by IIFOR 29.09.2007, updated 16.12.2007

We have found a use of the anarchist economical-political map at a (no longer existing) webpage on internet. It is an attempt to put some economical-political organizations on the map. We don't agree to everything, but this could be discussed more. We have first put up the original map of the Anarchist International, then the other.

 

"

*) The stars indicate the position of the Norwegian economical-political system after the revolutionary change in 1994/95.

Fig. 1. Picture of the Anarchist Economical-Political Map

Fig. 2. An attempt to use the map on several economical-political organizations

***

Very Interesting friends & companions!!!! - But, where do you put the eco-anarchists? Cheers & Hugs! + Piedro (From CHILE, Southamerica)

Answer from IIFOR: Quoting the eco-anarchist manifesto: "There will be a) no real anarchism without ecology sufficiently integrated, just market orientated half-anarchism, and b) no real ecology without anarchism in a societal perspective, only authoritarian or pseudolibertarian half-environmentalism." Thus the eco-anarchist perspective should be accounted for in all forms of anarchism, and a green anarchist society may  be social-individualist anarchy, collectivist anarchy, individualist anarchy, or communist anarchy  (see map). However, as an economical-political tendency the eco-anarchists are probably typically found to the left in the sector of social-individualist anarchism, in the anarchist quadrant, on the AI's map. This means a bit to the left of the "democratic socialists" on the other map.

Many Thanks for Your response Friends - I'm very interested in the Eco-Anarchist Manifesto - Please take a look at the following Website of the Australian Eco-Anarchist Ted Trainer: http://www.arts.unsw.edu.au/tsw/index.html , Yours, + Piedro (From Chile, Southamerica).

Answer from IIFOR: We agree that the Eco-Anarchist Manifesto, at http://www.anarchy.no/eam.html , is very important in these days of man-made global warming. However we think Ted Trainer is a bit too negative with respect to the benefits from development of new, environmentally friendly, technology. It is possible to have environmentally sustainable economic growth in the economy, if we do the right things.

***

Eu penso q no seu mapa político existem equívocoa a sanar: 1) não vejo como correto a divisão do anarquismo em correntes, que nunca se concretizaram - até a queda do muro de Berlim (quando o movimento libertário mundial foi invadido por ex-marxistas q nos trouxeram seus defeitos!); 2) ME PARECE CORRETO DEFINIR O @ COMO UMA CONCEPÇÃO DE SOCIALISMO QUE GARANTA A AUTONOMIA, MAS ME PARECE UM ABSURDO COLOCAR A SOCIAL-DEMOCRACIA NO MESMO QUADRANTE; 3) não existem anarquistas e socialistas libertários (!): se você é pela revolução com a destruição do Estado é anarquista e/ou socialista libertário,  q são sinônimos, não dois pensamentos diferentes. da mesma forma, desde Kropotkin, ou do início do século XX - com a formalização do sindicalismo revolucionário - o anarquismo se define como "COMUNISTA LIBERTÁRIO"! 4) TAMPOUCO VEJO LIBERTÁRIOS, OU ANARQUISTAS, EM MEIO AOS LIBERAIS - entre a autonomia e o capitalismo [que é inimigo de toda autonomia!]!
no mais, concordamos! SAÚDE E ANARCOSINDICALISMO - Renato Seixas

Answer from IIFOR: Thank you for the respons. We however cannot see that social-democrats are put in the quadrant of anarchism at the economical political map. The social democrats are put in the marxist quadrant of the maps of both fig.1 and fig. 2. We think that what is meant with the  expression "democratic socialists" on the map in fig. 2., in the social-individualist anarchist sector, is a form of libertarian socialism, real democracy, i.e.anarchism, not social democracy, or marxists. We agree that the organizations put in the anarchist quadrant of the fig. 2 map may be some what misleading. Say, in the original fig.1 map commune or communist anarchism is in the sector at the top of the map, and in general it represents the different anarchist tendencies in a much better way than the fig. 2 map. Furthermore "anarchists" are put on the top on the fig. 2 map. This is misleading. We think all tendencies within the anarchist quadrant (see fig. 1) are anarchist and represent anarchists of different kinds. The social-individualist sector of anarchism of the fig. 1 map, represents anarchism of a low degree. It is not communist anarchism, but still it is a form of anarchism.

THE 25 HIGHEST RANKING COUNTRIES ACCORDING TO LIBERTARIAN DEGREE ETC.
SYSTEM ANALYSIS

The estimates are approximately figures. © IIFOR/IJA ISSN 0800 – 0220 2007 and later.
Anarchy = here social-individualist anarchism; Soc. dem. = social democrat marxism; Populist = here moderate parliamentarian democratic fascism; Cons. lib. = Conservative liberalism. See economic-political map at http://www.anarchy.no/a_e_p_m.html . Ranking of countries according to libertarian degree, estimates of the libertarian degree in general, and information on methodology, see http://www.anarchy.no/ranking.html .

***

The Bush-administration and neoconservatives are rather authoritarian, but I don't think they are fascists, as suggested at fig. 2. I think both these tendencies are liberalists, however quite authoritarian. What do IIFOR mean? Another question, where do you place mutualists on the maps? Best regards D. Dorn

Answer from IIFOR: Regarding mutualists, the updated followers of Proudhon, they may be placed a bit to the right and upwards of "democratic socialists" on fig. 2., i.e. they are typically placed in the upper part of the social-individualist sector of the anarchist quadrant of anarchism on fig. 1. We agree that the Bush-administration and neoconservatives are not fascists, but liberalists, located in the conservative sector of the liberalist quadrant of the fig. 1. map. Thus, the fig. 2 map is misleading in this case. By "libertarians" on the fig. 2 map is meant right "libertarians", say, the so called Libertarian Party of USA and Ron Paul, located in the right liberalist sector of the fig. 1 map. The so called Libertarian Party of USA and Ron Paul are not libertarian in the ususal meaning of anarchist/anarchism = significant socialism and autonomy. The "Libertarian" Party and Ron Paul are not anarchist or close to at all, but most likely extremist liberalist.

USA on the economic-political map - new president 2009 but no significant change in the system's coordinates

The US' system is not fascist, but liberalist, located in the conservative sector of the liberalist quadrant of the economic-political map, see http://www.anarchy.no/a_e_p_m.html, at about 57%-60% authoritarian degree, the point estimate for USA at ca 57,5%, i.e. a libertarian degree at ca 42,5%. The degree of capitalism in USA is estimated to ca 75,5%, i.e. very significant (the degree of socialism is only ca 24,5%) The gini-index is estimated to 40.8, i.e. significantly above 35.0. As a rule of the thumb a gini-index below 35.0 indicates socialism, while a gini-index equal to or above 35.0 indicates capitalism/economical plutarchy. The degree of statism is estimated to ca 30,2%, and thus the degree of autonomy is ca 69,8%, i.e. very significant . These economical-political tendencies are clearly authoritarian, but far from totalitarian, i.e. more than 67% authoritarian degree.

2008: The president election 2008 is a choice between neo-conservatives (Republicans) and conservatives (Democrats) and will probably not change the system in USA significantly. We have thus no expectations to the demagogue Barack Obama regarding significant change of the US system's coordinates. 2009: The president of USA, since 2009, Barack Obama, has limited influence, a powerful lobby of the military-industrial complex has most of the power, and the fundamental domestic and international aims of USA are not changed. We will probably see some marginal, mostly cosmetical changes, but no significant change of the system's coordinates on the economic-political map. As far as this issue of the new president, president Obama, having taken over and this continuing, the AI has always been saying that policies don't change much with personalities. Policies have national interests, and policies depend on an environment. The environment and national interests of the United States are the same. Obama has said USA shall lead, i.e. rule, the world. The anarchists strongly oppose this megalomaniac approach.

28.04.2009. The Obama-government's first big mistake. A YouTube video showed panicked New Yorkers scrambling as a Boeing 747 followed by a fighter plane flew frighteningly close to the lower Manhattan skyline. The Federal Aviation Administration said the aircraft, which functions as Air Force One when the president is aboard, was taking part in a classified, government-sanctioned photo shoot. Fran Townsend, who advised President George W. Bush for more than three years, called the move "crass insensitivity" in the wake of 9/11: "I'd call this felony stupidity." The half-hour flight triggered the evacuation of a number of office buildings in the city - Mayor Michael Bloomberg said he was "furious" he had not been warned. On Tuesday, Obama told reporters, "It was a mistake. It was something we found out about along with all of you. And it will not happen again." 08.05.2009. White House Military Office Director Louis Caldera has resigned amid controversy over a low-altitude flyover of New York. So Obama seems to put the blame on his subordinates. Obama should take the full responsibility himself.

15.05.2009. Anger at Obama Guantanamo ruling. Civil liberties groups and anarchists have reacted angrily to US President Barack Obama's decision to revive military trials for some Guantanamo Bay detainees. 18.11.2009. US President Barack Obama has for the first time admitted that the US will miss the January 2010 deadline he set for closing the Guantanamo Bay prison. Mr Obama made the admission in interviews with US TV networks during his tour of Asia. Also this time civil liberties groups and anarchists have reacted angrily. 15.12.2009 The Obama administration said it will move some Guantanamo Bay detainees to an Illinois prison, the Thomson Correctional Center, and hold U.S. military commission trials there. Anarchists and others criticized Obama's plan as a.o.t a security risk. This move seems to create more problems than it solves, anarchists say. 23.12.2009. Rebuffed by skeptical lawmakers when it sought finances to buy an Illinois prison, the Obama administration is unlikely to close the Guantánamo Bay prison until 2011 at the earliest. 05.01.2010. Obama says he remains committed to closing the Guantanamo Bay detention center in Cuba, but not in January 2010 as promised.

10.11.2009. Anarchist comment to US President Barack Obama's response to last week's killings of 13 people at an army base in Texas, that of course the anarchists condemn.

Mr Obama's comments came in an address to a memorial service for the victims of the Fort Hood shootings, after he met relatives of those who died. Maj Nidal Malik Hasan, who was carrying out the massacre, was shot by police and remains in hospital. US intelligence authorities have said they knew Maj Hasan had been in contact with a cleric sympathetic to al-Qaeda.

Mr Obama said "It may be hard to comprehend the twisted logic that led to this tragedy, but this much we do know - no faith justifies these murderous and craven acts; no just and loving God looks upon them with favour," he continued. "And for what he has done, we know that the killer will be met with justice - in this world, and the next."

Anarchists at large are atheists, with a small dash of agnosticism, and thus believe about zero in "the next" world be it heaven, limbo or hell or something else, and we find it strange that Obama and his "we", "know" so much about "the next" world. How can Obama be certain that "the killer will be met with justice - in this world, and the next "? The anarchists at large are not among Obama's "we". He does not speak for us.

Anarchists are against capital punishment and other barbaric and authoritarian punishment "in this world" and believe about zero of punishment and justice in "the next", see Anarchism and Human Rights, http://www.anarchy.no/anrights.html . This is justice. Obama is a) for capital punishment and thus at odds with justice and should b) leave the practically certain lies about justice in "the next" world to a professional lier, and real beast, as the catholic pope. Obama's comments in this case confirm the megalomaniac tendency of  Obama's ideas. The anarchists don't trust Obama and we warn others about this dangerous authority, practically certain at odds with justice and reality. Obama may be worse than Bush... What will be the next???

14.01.2010. About the earthquake in Haiti. "This is one of those moments that calls out for American leadership,” according to US President Barack Obama who has announced fresh help for Haiti. Help is of course OK and supported by the anarchists, but "American leadership", i.e. ruler of the world - NO - the Anarchist International declares.

The extreme capitalism/economical plutarchy in USA makes violation of fundamental workers' rights

There is a poor record on worker protection, particularly in the areas of trade union rights and child labor, areas in which serious violations continue to take place. US law excludes large groups of workers from the right to organize. These include agricultural workers, many public sector workers, domestic workers, supervisors and independent contractors. Moreover, for most private sector workers forming labor federations is extremely difficult and anti-union pressure from employers is frequent. There is a huge union-busting industry which aims at undermining trade union organizing. Some 82 per cent of employers hire such companies that employ a wide range of anti-union tactics. Employers also force employees to listen to anti-union propaganda and threaten workers with company closures if they vote to form a labor federation. The US administration, rather than leading the way on protection of the rights of working people and on decent pay and conditions, has been intent on denying the freedom to join a union and bargain collectively to millions of American workers. This hurts America's working people and has a negative impact on workers' rights in other countries as well. Figures from the US Department of Labor show that the Bush Administration has been cutting back even further on labor law enforcement, now spending an average of only US$26 per employer, while spending on rigorous oversight of trade union activities amounts to an average of $2,500 per union/local union. This will probably not change much under the Obama Administration.

The Employee Free Choice Act, which would redress some of the imbalances workers are subject to, was blocked by Senate Republicans last year despite passing the House of Representatives and gaining majority support in the Senate. Moreover, the National Labor Relations Board took a number of decisions in 2007 which withdrew various workers' protections and weakened already ineffective remedies. Among these decisions was one that makes it harder for workers who are illegally fired to recover back pay and another to make it easier to discriminate against employees who are union representatives. Child labor is in many cases not effectively addressed in the US, particularly in agriculture and not least because of the hazardous conditions that children are exposed to. Many of the children are migrant farm workers, often Latino. Not enough urgency is being shown with the Children's Act for Responsible Employment (CARE) currently before the Subcommittee on Workforce Protections of the House of Representatives, which would bring standards for children working in agriculture in line with standards for other sectors.  Moreover, child labor inspections are falling. 

Concerning discrimination and remuneration it should be noted that women continue to earn less than men (80.8%), and that for most women of color this gap is even larger. Women earn less in every occupational category, even in occupations where they outnumber men.  Nurses and middle school teachers earn 10% less than their male colleagues even though over 80% of the employees are female. Forced labor remains a problem in the US, in particular with forced labor in agriculture for migrant workers, and manufacturing (garments) in US overseas territories, in particular the Northern Mariana Islands. Working conditions are severe, and recruitment practices often result in indentured servitude.

14.01.2010. Social dumping. Immigrant sheepherders endure harsh work, low pay. Alone and thousands of miles from home, the immigrant sheepherder roams some of the West's most desolate and frigid landscapes, tending a flock for as little as $600 a month without a day off on the horizon. Colorado Legal Services, a Denver-based nonprofit legal assistance network, visited sheepherders with temporary work visas in Colorado, Utah and Wyoming and found they sometimes toil more than 90 hours a week, can't leave the isolated sites where they work and are grossly underpaid by U.S. standards. Rep. Daniel Kagan, a Democrat from Denver, said sheepherders often don't speak English, don't know where they are, and depend entirely on their employers for food, water and contact with the outside world. "It struck me as a situation rife with the possibility of abuse, and I was afraid that we were looking at a situation of indentured servitude, of near slavery, right here in Colorado, and that troubled me a lot," Kagan said. The struggling U.S. sheep industry argues the immigrants - and the current pay scale - are crucial to its survival and that the jobs give foreign workers opportunities for a better life back home. That is how the US capitalism works.

1 in 6 went hungry in America in 2008

Forty-nine million people in American households — one in six — went hungry or had insufficient food at some point in 2008, the highest number since the government began tracking the problem in 1995. The biggest increases were among households with children and people who were hungry most often. The report, issued by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, found that 17 million people in the U.S. went hungry or did not eat regularly for a few days of each month over seven or eight months last year. That's a 45% increase from 12 million people in 2007. In 2008, 16.7 million children did not eat regularly at some point, up from 12.4 million in 2007. 17.11.2009.

Unenlightened plutarchy

The system in USA is what economic Nobel Prize winner and anarchist Ragnar Frisch called an "unenlightened plutarchy". USA has a long road to go before it becomes an anarchy, socialist and autonomous. It will not happen while Obama is in charge.

---

Failed States - Comment from IIFOR - Contributions from Noam Chomsky, etc.

To Henrik Thune

I have of course read your review as well as the book. You have not directly said Chomsky's book is marxist-leninism, but says he "sees red", and also that he is somewhat similar to the marxist-leninist Sigurd Allern. Chomsky's economic-political tendency is anarchism, not marxism of any kind. You should have mentioned this in your ariticle, not indicated he is red (marxism) and similar to marxist-leninism. Besides I don't think your  review is very representative for the book.

Best regards P. Johansen - Tuesday, June 24, 2008 10:10 AM

PS. Noam Chomsky is a dedicated anarchist - not liberal. Chomsky has written several works on anarchism - you should call a spade a spade Thune! The work Manufacturing Consent is not at all a neo-marxist analysis. It is clearly an anarchist analysis. You are insulting Chomsky and anarchists in general by calling this book and TV-program neo-marxist. - Tuesday, June 24, 2008 12.10 AM

Dear P. Johansen:

I read in your comments to Chomsky on my review of his book Failed states that I have described Chomsky or his work as Marxist-leninism. That is a total misreading of my review, as you probably are well aware of, if you read the piece.

Best regards

Henrik T - Monday, June 23, 2008 9:07 PM

The expression "sees red" is something the paper decided to use. I also believe that self-description is a false criteria for any definition. That also goes for Chomsky and his political camp. Take for instance Manufacturing Consent with Herman. That is a classic neo-marxist analysis of the media. 

all the best  Henrik T - Tuesday, June 24, 2008 11:19 AM

PS1: One has to, I believe, differentiate between Marxism as an analytical/theoretical view and Marxism as a political/ideological position.

PS2: I did explicitly describe Chomsky as a (radical) liberal. That is my reading of him, anyway. My main problem with failed states is that is empirically tendentious. Many of his point would have been made much strong if the empirical work was more systematic and precise. In this regard I see a clear weakening in Chomsky's political writing.

cheers

Henrik  T - Tuesday, June 24, 2008 11:31 AM

----- Original Message -----
From: Noam Chomsky
To: IIFOR
Sent: Saturday, June 14, 2008 4:50 PM
Subject: Re: Failed States - Comment from IIFOR- Answer from Chomsky, etc

Thanks for the information. Sorry to hear about that.  I don't pay much attention to translations -- don't have time -- but I'll make a note about this. Update 6:45 PM: I didn't intend to react to this piece of nonsense, just as I don't respond to the screeching of the commissar class elsewhere. What I meant is that I'll make a note to myself to pay attention to Norwegian translations in the future, thanks to the information you sent, appreciated.

Noam Chomsky

To  Noam Chomsky

1. Yes, the publisher is the marxist-leninist (maoist) Oktober Forlag,  named after the october revolution in Russia, founded by the maoists (and stalinists) in the party AKP-ml, now the main part of the revolutionary marxist communist and leninist party Rødt (Red) (also including trotskyites). It was however later sold to Aschehoug because of economic problems, but has still mainly marxist-leninist authors and tendency. See http://no.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forlaget_Oktober .

2. There is no reference to your anarchism, in the newspapers here, but as mentioned a parallel to the maoist marxist-leninist Sigurd Allern.

3. And you are quite correct that this article is a hysterical rant.

Best regards P. Johansen

---- Original Message -----
From: Noam Chomsky
To: IIFOR
Sent: Saturday, June 14, 2008 3:50 AM
Subject: Re: Failed States - Comment from IIFOR

Thanks for sending.  I could read enough of the article to see that it is a hysterical rant.  Are you saying that the book was published by a maoist marxist-leninist publisher?  That's news to me, and a surprise.

Noam Chomsky

----- Original Message -----
From: IIFOR
To: Noam Chomsky
Cc: Anarchists and syndicalists etc
Sent: Friday, June 13, 2008 6:56 PM
Subject: Failed States - Comment from IIFOR

To Noam Chomsky

Your book "Failed States" is now published in Norwegian. I have some comments. It is referred in Morgenbladet by a researcher from the Norwegian Institute for Foreign Politics, Norsk utenrikspolitisk institutt (Nupi), which draws parallels to the maoist marxist-leninist Sigurd Allern, and it is published on the maoist marxist-leninist publishing house Forlaget Oktober. Bad company. Quoting:

Trekker sløret vekk og ser rødt. Noam Chomsky: En skrivende Michael Moore, en amerikansk Sigurd Allern.

Av Henrik Thune. Forsker ved Norsk utenrikspolitisk institutt (Nupi)

Det tydeligste, og jeg tror også det mest utfordrende, ved Noam Chomskys enorme forfatterskap som politisk aktivist og USA-refser, er hans totale insistering på at nesten alt det vi mener å vite om verden, ikke er virkelig, men et produkt av systematisk propaganda for å tilsløre helt banale maktinteresser.

Dette er også essensen av Chomskys siste utgivelse på norsk, Mislykkede stater . For eksempel: Den liberale avisen New York Times er ikke liberal, men et propagandainstrument som forleder amerikanere til å tro at USA er et liberalt og folkestyrt samfunn. Det frie økonomiske markedet er ikke fritt, men skalkeskjul for et økonomisk system der staten kanaliserer enorme ressurser til elitene og etablerte storselskaper. Og vestens utenrikspolitikk for menneskerettigheter og frihet er ikke forankret i etikk, men er retorikk for å usynliggjøre global dominans og maktmisbruk.

Elitemakt. Vi er alle ofre, mener Chomsky, for en høyttravende, amerikansk liberal samfunnsretorikk. Den kamuflerer realitetene, og fornekter kritikk. Eller som han sier det, inspirert av franskmannen Alexis de Tocquevilles møte med USA på 1800-tallet: «USA klarte 'å utrydde den indianske rasen […] uten å bryte et eneste grunnleggende moralsk prinsipp i verdens øyne'.»

På denne måten, må man si, er Chomsky en typisk representant for et velkjent samfunnssyn, og en ikke usedvanlig USA-kritisk posisjon: Flertallsstyret er en myte. Elitemakten beskyttes av tilsynelatende liberale institusjoner som media og akademia. Og all politikk og fremferd på den internasjonale scenen vil til syvende og sist dreie seg om «enkeltmoral»: «Alt til oss selv, og ingenting til andre.»

Ingen politisk teori. Forskjellen på Chomsky og mange av hans antatt nærmeste politiske sympatisører i Europa og Norge, er likevel påfallende. Chomsky er ikke spesielt ideologisk anlagt, nesten tvert om. Chomsky er empiriker. Det vil si, han er nærmest som en amerikansk skrankeadvokat. Han formulerer ikke tydelige læresetninger eller nye politiske teorier – ingen politiske programmer utenom helt allmennmenneskelige menneskerettighetsprinsipper. Isteden ønsker han å overbevise juryen (som er leserne hans) ved å løfte frem etablerte fakta, for så å forsøke å mane frem et nytt og annet perspektiv.

Det er akkurat dette som er det utfordrende og styrken ved Chomskys beste bøker om samtidspolitikk. For å si det knapt: Hos Chomsky handler alt om fakta og virkelighetsgjengivelse. At systemet er udemokratisk og elitestyrt, og at den eneste formen for meningsfull samfunnskritikk i USA er å møte propaganda med anti-propaganda.

Fiffig. Sånn sett er det mye hos Chomsky som kan minne om dokumentarfilmene til Michael Moore. Kanskje har vi å gjøre med en særegen form for amerikansk samfunnskritikk? En samfunnskritikk som har vinket farvel til det siste århundrets høyre/venstre-rivaliseringer i vestlig politisk historie, og isteden nesten utelukkende handler om å bedrive mediekritikk: Å tvinge sannheten frem overfor en befolkning som, i alle fall for Chomsky, er paralysert av en monoton medievirkelighet, ute av stand til å gjøre seg opp sine egne meninger.

Mislykkede stater har akkurat de kvalitetene og skavankene man kan forvente seg av et slikt politisk anti-propaganda-prosjekt. På en side er boken fiffig og smart. Innledningsvis tar Chomsky tak i et av de aller mest populære begrepene i amerikansk utenrikspolitikk de siste årene, såkalte «mislykkede stater», eller i Bushs definisjon, fiendtlige «røverstater». Deretter snur Chomsky perspektivet 180 grader rundt, og forsøker å vise hvordan disse definisjonene passer på USA vel så mye som på Nord-Korea eller Iran.

Retoriske triks. På en annen side er boken til tider nesten umulig å lese. Den er tett, full av sitater, opplistinger av tall og hendelser. Og i tråd med all den politiske retorikken Chomsky ønsker å avsløre, er boken også full av retoriske triks og selektiv bruk av fakta og sitater. Chomskys anti-propaganda minner innimellom stygt om propaganda i anti-propagandaens navn. Igjen finnes det paralleller til Michael Moore og hans dokumentar Fahrenheit 9/11 , eller til den australskfødte tv-journalisten John Pilgers mange kritiske filmer om amerikansk utenrikspolitikk. Hos dem alle er overbevisningskraften mer en funksjon av retoriske grep, enn etterrettelighet og kildekritikk.

Sigurd Allern. En parentes til slutt: Jeg skrev over at Chomsky representerer en særegen form for amerikansk samfunnskritikk, som har forkastet ideologi til fordel for mediekritikk. Men dette er kanskje ikke helt riktig. Man finner en lignende orientering også i Norge. Jeg tenker på rekken av tidligere venstrerevolusjonære med medieprofessor Sigurd Allern i spissen, som har erstattet fortidens revolusjonslære med medieanalyse og med rollen som læremestere for norske journaliststudenter. Kampen utkjempes ikke lenger i samfunnet, men om medienes virkelighetsgjengivelser.

Og her må man si at Allern et al har et taktisk fortrinn fremfor Chomsky. For riktignok er Chomsky en viktig skikkelse i deler av amerikansk offentlighet. Men noen direkte innflytelse og makt over de institusjonene som utdanner fremtidens mediefolk – og som dermed skal forvalte det den store italienske marxisten Antonio Gramsci kalte samfunnets «kulturelle hegemoni» – det har nok Chomsky ikke tilkjempet seg.

anmeldelse
Noam Chomsky
Mislykkede stater
Maktmisbruk og angrep på demokratiet
Oversatt av Morten Hansen.
354 sider. Forlaget Oktober. 2008 (original utgave 2006)

Anarchy is real democracy

There are only three real democracies in the world: Norway, Switzerland and Iceland. USA is not a real democracy, but a semi- or pseudo-democracy, but it is not totalitarian or a failed state, according to IIFOR's standards.

1. Anarchy and anarchism mean "system and management without ruler(s), i.e. co-operation without repression, tyranny and slavery".

Briefly defined anarchy and anarchism are coordination on equal footing, without superiors and subordinates, i.e. horizontal organization and co-operation without coercion. This means practically or ideally, i.e. ordinary vs perfect horizontal organization respectively. Thus, anarchy and anarchism mean real democracy, economical and political/administrative, in private and public sector.

Anarchies are systems with significantly small rank and income differences, plus efficiency, i.e. significantly horizontally organized.

2. Briefly defined State/authority/government in a broad societal meaning is systems with significantly large rank and/or income differences and inefficient, i.e. significantly vertically organized.

(This is opposed to Max Weber's definition. The crucial point is horizontal vs vertical organization, not whether there are one or several law and order agencies in a local area. More about Max Weber's outdated definitions of state and anarchy, and the modern definitions, see http://www.anarchy.no/begreper.html .)

We are for anarchy and anarchism as defined in 1, and against State/authority/government as defined in 2.

A bit simplified: Society is private sector plus public sector, both significantly horizontally organized in anarchy.

* Real democracy means one vote per head, participatory, plus anarchist basic rights that secure that the majority cannot decide that the minority must slave for them one way or the other, or worse. Thus the case that the majority "two wolves" decide that the minority "lamb" should be dinner, or similar is avoided. The anarchist rights can be brought for the anarchist law and order system, in case of disputes.

In some cases, say, at which side on the road we should drive, right or left, simple majority > 50% is ok. In other cases general consent - a lot for, and no-one against, is necessary. In some cases 2/3 or 3/4 majority is ok.

As for private sector, based on markets, there is one dollar (or labor notes credit) one vote, and it is real democratic, anarchist, only if the income-distribution is significantly horizontally organized (and the economy is efficient). If the income-distribution is significally hierarchical it is economical plutarchy, not anarchy/ism

As for public sector, it will be organized according to *.

Countries that are not real democracies, i.e. anarchies, are States according to 2. i.e. semi- or pseudo-democracies, or even worse, totalitarian with more than 67% authoritarian degree, among them failed states. Since USA has an authoritarian degree of ca 57,5%, its is not totalitarian, with more than 67% authoritarian degree, and thus USA is not a failed state. See Fig.1, the table "THE 25 HIGHEST RANKING COUNTRIES ACCORDING TO LIBERTARIAN DEGREE...", and the note "USA on the economic-political map" above, and the note "ANARCHY VS ECONOMIC-POLITICAL CHAOS - FAILED STATES ARE STATES - ARCHIES - NOT ANARCHY" at http://www.anarchy.no/apt.html .

Best regards P. Johansen of IIFOR

---

Argentina, Chile and Brazil on the economic-political map

Other conservative liberalist economic-political systems are found in Argentina, Chile, Brazil and Bolivia. Argentina is ranked as no 45 of countries according to libertarian degree, with a point estimate of ca 37,8% libertarian degree, i.e. ca 62,2% authoritarian degree. It is more authoritarian than the USA, with ca 42,5% libertarian degree and ca 57,5% authoritarian degree. It is also more capitalist than the USA, with a gini-index at 52.2, while the USA has a gini-index at 40.8. The degree of capitalism in Argentina is estimated to ca 77%, i.e. very significant (the degree of socialism is only ca 23%). The degree of statism is ca 42,5%, and thus the degree of autonomy is ca 57,5%, i.e. clearly significant. Argentina is located in the conservative sector, a little to the left, and a bit downwards, of USA, in the quadrant of liberalism on the economical-political map. Thus, Argentina has left the populist chaos of Duhalde with more than 67% authoritarian degree. The president Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner is ideologically a left populist, but this is not the tendency of the economic-political system of Argentina, seen as a whole.

Chile is located to the right of Argentina and USA, a bit more downwards on the map than Argentina, and a little more authoritarian. The point estimate of the libertarian degree is ca 37,6%. i.e. the authoritarian degree is ca 62,4%. The degree of capitalism is ca 81%, i.e. very significant, with a gini-index at 57,1 (the degree of socialism is thus ca 18%, i.e. far from significant). The degree of autonomy is ca 65%. i.e. very significant, and the degree of statism is only ca 35%. Chile is ranked as no 46, behind Argentina, on the ranking of countries according to libertarian degree. Chile was earlier, under Pinochet, a fascist system, but is now a parliamentary democracy, and that contributes to the significant autonomy.

Brazil has a totalitarian liberalist-capitalist system, also located in the conservative sector in the liberalist quadrant of the map. The authoritarian degree is thus more than 67%, with a point estimate at 67,6%, and a libertarian degree at only 32,4%. The degree of capitalism in Brazil is ca 81,8%, i.e. very, very significant, with a gini-index at 59,3 ( the degree of socialism is only 18,2%). The degree of autonomy is 50,5%, i.e. significant, and the degree of statism is 49,5%. Brazil has a parliamentary system, it is not a dictatorship, and this contributes to the significant degree of autonomy. The extreme high degree of capitalism makes it however to a totalitarian system, seen as a whole. Brazil is located very little to the left of the Argentinian system, and a bit downwards, on the economic-political map. The system is as mentioned located within the conservative sector of the quadrant of liberalism on the map (see fig.1) , but it is not very far from the right fascist sector, in the quadrant of fascism on the map. All in all a very authoritarian system, ranked as no 69 on the ranking of countries according to libertarian degree.

The situation in Bolivia

16.12.2007: Bolivia by now has a totalitarian liberalist-capitalist system, located in the conservative sector in the liberalist quadrant of the economical-politcal map, see http://www.anarchy.no/a_e_p_m.html  . The authoritarian degree is thus more than 67%, with a point estimate at ca 72,6% and a libertarian degree at only ca 27,4%. The degree of capitalism in Bolivia is estimated to ca 90%, i.e. very, very significant, because of a high gini-index, at 44,7, and very low economic efficiency, i.e. the GDP per capita (2003) is only 892 US $ ( the degree of socialism is only ca 10%). The degree of autonomy is 50,5%, i.e. significant, and the degree of statism is 49,5%. Bolivia has a parliamentary system, it is not a dictatorship, and this a.o.t. contributes to the significant degree of autonomy. The extreme high degree of capitalism makes it however to a totalitarian system, seen as a whole. Bolivia is located to the right of the Brazilian system, and quite a bit downwards, on the economic-political map. The system is as mentioned located within the conservative sector of the quadrant of liberalism on the map, but it is not very far from the right fascist sector, in the quadrant of fascism on the map. All in all a very authoritarian system, ranked as no 116 on the ranking of countries according to libertarian degree.

Historically Bolivia has had some anarchosyndicalist unions, and there are today some libertarian tendencies among women and indigenous people, but they have little influence on the system seen all in all. The most well known anarchist activist (and professor emeritus in sociology of UMSA) is Silvia Rivera Cusicanqui.

Now the president has proposed more centralization and heavier taxation, thus the system will have less autonomy, and become fascist if it is implemented, i.e. if the degree of socialism is not improved considerably. There is no reason to believe that. This proposal will most likely not make the system significantly socialist.

Facing fascism, four Bolivian regions declare autonomy from government.  Tensions were rising in Bolivia on Saturday 15.12.2007 as members of the country's four highest natural gas-producing regions declared autonomy from the central government. Ruben Costas, center, governor of Santa Cruz, celebrates as the Bolivian region declares autonomy Saturday. Thousands waved the Santa Cruz region's green-and-white flags in the streets as council members of the Santa Cruz, Tarija, Beni and Pando districts made the public announcement. The officials displayed a green-bound document containing a set of statutes paving the way to a permanent separation from the Bolivian government. Council representatives vowed to legitimize the autonomy statutes through a referendum that would legally separate the natural-gas rich districts from President Evo Morales' government. The move also aims to separate the states from Bolivia's new constitution, which calls for, among other things, a heavier taxation on the four regions to help finance more social programs. "The statutes will be ratified," said Oscar Ortiz, Santa Cruz senator. "With a public referendum, the people of our region will legitimize their will." About 35 percent of Bolivia's 9.5 million people live in the four states, according to The Associated Press. In the meantime, Bolivian network ATV showed what appeared to be armed, pro-government protesters creating blockades around the town of Yapacani, on the outskirts of Santa Cruz.

Some indigenous pro-Morales groups claim Bolivia's richer, white-ruled Eastern regions want to control the country's natural resources. Bolivia has South America's second-largest natural gas reserves, behind Venezuela. Most of it is produced in the Eastern regions. In the capital city La Paz on Saturday, Morales addressed thousands of flag-waving supporters in the Plaza Murillo, defending the new constitution and lashing out against what he called the racist policies of Bolivia's elite. "They must give back the money they took from us," he told a cheering crowd, which included members of the Quechua and Aymara tribes. "We will retroactively investigate all the big fortunes, and the corrupt are now trembling with fear." Morales also cautioned those who he said want a "a division, a coup d'etat," the AP reported. "We won't permit Bolivia to be divided," he warned. Morales -- who belongs to the Aymara indigenous group -- nationalized the country's oil and natural gas reserves when he took power in 2006, creating what became known as the "gas wars." Running on a platform of redistribution of wealth among Bolivia's poor, Morales has defied countries such as Brazil and the United States for the exploration of Bolivia's natural reserves. He has also protested the country's racial divide. "Bolivia is a nation among nations," he said Saturday, referring to the diversity of Indian nations whose traditions date back centuries. "We are not a country of blue-eyed, green-eyed folks only. It's a plurinational country made of dark-skinned and white-skinned. This new constitution will unite us."

We see a problem with the relatively rich areas' autonomy, perhaps it will increase the degree of capitalism in the country even more. From anarchist point of view this is bad . However fascism is no solution . The anarchists propose other measures to reduce the degree of capitalism, i.e. more autonomy in general combined with income transferring measures ( from the rich to the poor) and more efficiency, based on decentralization . Thus, the anarchists partly support the autonomy movement, but it must be more general, with socialist elements, to be really libertarian.

05.05.2008: Bolivia vote shows depth of divisions. The referendum with a clear majority vote for more autonom in Santa Cruz has placed the biggest obstacle yet in front of Mr Morales's planned reforms to re-orient Bolivia with a socialist twist, giving a greater share of the land and resources to the country's indigenous majority. This is something the draft constitution of Morales - yet to be approved - is supposed to do. Before thousands of exultant "crucenos" - as the people from Santa Cruz are called - Ruben Costas, the now self-declared governor of Santa Cruz, claimed that the victory meant, "initiating the path towards a new republic". Supporters of more autonomy for the region want to loosen what they term the "totalitarian and hegemonic centralism" of the central government in La Paz. "I am happy because we are now free to manage ourselves, with Santa Cruz's own resources," autonomy supporter Charito Cardenas told the BBC as she waved her "autonomy" flag. "Autonomy represents freedom, independence, living tranquil, living in peace - the freedom for Santa Cruz and for the whole of Bolivia which is what we want", she said. But not all areas of Santa Cruz were celebrating as effusively. 

In a country where ideological confrontation is commonplace, violent clashes between pro-Morales and pro-autonomy supporters in some of Mr Morales' strongholds left one dead and more than 20 injured. Some people were prevented from voting, ballot boxes were burnt and roads were blocked. But in the end, Bolivia's wealthiest region passed a statute of autonomy that would grant the department more local decision-making and more control over land, taxes and gas and oil revenues. For some analysts, the autonomy movement was instigated by the region's wealthy elite, with a good deal of economic self-interest and racism as fuel. That is something some residents of Santa Cruz also feel. "Why did these oligarchs that are pushing for autonomy want our vote now?" asks Marina, a woman of the Aymara indigenous group who has been living in Plan 3000, a humble neighbourhood of mud roads on the edge of Santa Cruz city, for the past 45 years. "They always hated us, the indigenous people, they still do and they will always will. We suffer because of them. "The autonomy they are proposing is nothing more than a trick to keep strangling the poor," she added. On the floor, a pamphlet from the pro-Morales supporters asking the people not to vote shows a swastika and calls the opposition a (Masonic) "lodge". For Gabriela Montano, the president's delegate in Santa Cruz, "this is not a result in favour or against autonomy, because this process, for various reasons, it is fragmenting the country." For many, this pits the elite in Santa Cruz, who are of European descent, against Mr Morales' peasants and indigenous supporters, and squeezes his beleaguered attempt to change the course of South America's poorest country.

"I hope the government will hear the call of its people now, and not the call of Venezuela's left-wing President Hugo Chavez, and will start choosing its own course and accept this autonomy and decide it's time to sit down and talk", former president and leader of the opposition Jorge "Tuto" Quiroga told BBC. For Mr Chavez, who is an unconditional ally of Mr Morales, this autonomy hides a "Kosovo-style plan" to destabilise the government and divide Bolivia. At least three more departments may follow Santa Cruz with their own autonomy votes. Conscious that the autonomy debate is proving deeply divisive, Mr Morales has called for dialogue even though he declared the vote to be illegal after knowing the results. The Organisation of American States and the catholic church also called unsuccessfully for dialogue in recent weeks. "We have always been willing to hold dialogue and we will always push for a national pact," the president of Santa Cruz's Civic Committee, Branko Marinkovic, told. "Bolivia will now start to march on a new path called autonomy. It won't be a short one, it might be a rocky one, but it will be the one Bolivia has democratically chosen," he added. All over the centre of Santa Cruz city that choice is being cheerfully celebrated by the many who wanted autonomy. Now, both parts agree they should start a dialogue. What comes next has a big question mark. In the meantime, Santa Cruz is enjoying a long night of celebrations as the rhythmic chant of "autonomy, autonomy" resounds across the city.

02.06.2008: Bolivia grabs control of gas firm. The Bolivian government has taken full control of a key gas pipeline company after talks with the foreign firm that held a controlling stake broke down. President Evo Morales said Transredes had been seized after US company Ashmore Energy International failed to agree to a share buy-back. Transredes transports Bolivia's natural gas to clients in Brazil and Argentina. It is the latest move in the Bolivian president's recent effort to nationalise key industries. Ashmore has yet to comment on the move. President Morales said Ashmore had agreed to sell some of its 25% share in the firm but that these talks had not led to a deal. "We waited patiently all month, but the actions they took were totally different," the president said. "They wanted to be bosses, and have us be the employees. We're a small country - sometimes they call us underdeveloped - but we have lots of dignity. Partners are welcome, but we will not accept bosses." Officials said Royal Dutch Shell, cited as another foreign in investor in the pipeline, had wanted to work with them. President Morales came to power two years ago promising his country's poor a greater share in revenues from the oil and gas industry. The president's radical plans have upset foreign companies and threaten to split the country. Three regions in Bolivia's east, where most of the oil and gas is found, have recently voted for greater autonomy and oppose sending more revenues to the central government. Parts of Bolivia's energy industry was privatised in the 1990s, with foreign companies taking 50% stakes. Last month Bolivia's state energy company bought a majority stake in Spanish-owned Andina, one of the country's biggest energy companies which exploits oil and gas fields, and owns a 50% stake in two giant gas fields. It has also taken over, by state decree, the control of Chaco from BP and Pan American Energy. Mr Morales is an ally of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, who has also taken back control of a number of industries from foreign control, including oil, electricity and cement.

Colombia

03.06.2008: Murders of labor activists - a consequence of the extreme capitalism/economical plutarchy. The Colombian government appeared today in Geneva before the Committee on the Application of Standards at the ILO's annual session of the International Labour Conference. During the debate, workers' delegates from around the world referred to the violations of freedom of association and collective bargaining rights in Colombia. Since the beginning of 2008, 26 labor activists have been murdered, a 71 per cent increase from the same period last year. For all of these murders impunity persists, as for some 97% of the more than 2,500 murders of Colombian labor activists since 1986. The Colombian government appeared before the committee as the result of the extraordinary pressure from the international labor movement, which rejected its attempts to avoid coming before the committee. The outcome of the discussion on Colombia will be included in the full conclusions and recommendations of the committee.

Belize's place on the economic-political map

Belize is an example of a right fascist state. The country is quite authoritarian, and a democracy in the name only. Population below powerty line 33,5 % (2002 est.), inefficient with just 3 612 US $ per capita income/GDP (2003), and falling adult literacy rate from 89,1 % in 1990 to 76,9 % in 2003. The degree of capitalism is estimated to ca 79,0 % and the degree of statism to 59,9 %, and thus the system is located in the right fascist sector (close to right populism) of the fascist quadrant of the map. All in all a totalitarian capitalist state with ca 29,9% libertarian degree, i.e. ca 70,1 % authoritarian degree.

***

I think the maoists, bolsheviks, and trotskyites are more authoritarian than what are suggested on fig. 2. They are all marxist-leninists and will produce a somewhat rich bureaucracy, and advocate dictatorship of ( i.e. over), the proletariate. What do IIFOR think about this? Anarchist greetings P. Gordon

Answer from IIFOR: The fig.2 map is quite misleading in these cases. Both maoists, bolsheviks and trotskyites are ideologically totalitarian state-communists, not located far left and not so very authoritarian, as suggested on fig. 2. They are all ideologically located in the state-communist sector of the marxist quadrant of the fig.1 map.

China's place on the economic-political map

The maoists are ideologically totalitarian state-communists. They are all ideologically located in the state-communist sector of the marxist quadrant of the economic-political map. However in practice, as now in China, the maoists are left fascists : As a rule of the thumb a gini-index above 35 indicates economical plutarchy/capitalism, while a gini-index below 35 indicates socialism. Thus China, with a gini-index at 44.7 is clearly capitalist, and it is not very efficient, with GDP per capita at only 1,100 US $ per year. Thus it has very significant economical plutarchy, about 62 1/3% degree of capitalism. Furthermore it is a dictatorship, with a very high degree of statism. The degree of statism is about 76%. Thus it has both significant amount of capitalism as well as statism, and thus it is a fascist country, see http://www.anarchy.no/a_e_p_m.html and http://www.anarchy.no/ranking.html . It is no 88 on the ranking of countries according to libertarian degree, i.e. it is clearly very authoritarian.

The point estimate for China is ca 30,5% libertarian degree, i.e. 69,5% authoritarian degree, located in the left fascist sector of the fascist quadrant of the economic-political map. The system is totalitarian, with more than 67% authoritarian degree. Norway and Switzerland are ranked as no 1 and 2 respectively, they are anarchies of low degree. USA is ranked as 22, being significantly autonomous and capitalist, i.e. liberalist. If we look only at the ginindex, the USA seems less capitalist than China, with a gini-index of 40.8 in USA, compared to 44.7 in China. But we have also other indicators, i.e. a.o.t. economic regulations, the very large agricultural sector is not very capitalistic, etc., and thus, for the system seen all in all as a whole, the degree of capitalism in China is less than of the USA. But still the degree of capitalism, economical plutarchy, in China, is clearly significant. Conclusion: The system in China is left fascist, in practice not state communist, on the economic-political map.

Let us not be dazzled by percentage economic growth . China has a very weak income-development compared to Norway. China has as mentioned a real income (GDP) at 1 100 US $  per capita per year. Ten percent growth is 110 US $ income increase per year. In Norway the real income per capita is 48 412 US $ per year. A growth at 3% means 1 452 US $. Thus the growth in income per capita is 13 times as high in Norway, compared to China. The very high gini-index in China shows that the small income-growth in US $ is not benefiting the people (as opposed to upper classes), the grassroots and working class broadly defined, significantly.

01.10.2009. 60 years of brutal repressive communist party rule in China is marked by putting  together its biggest-ever military parade: hundreds of thousands of marchers, batteries of goose-stepping soldiers and weaponry from drone missiles to amphibious assault vehicles. The "People's Liberation" Army in its newspaper early this year said the event's meaning was clear: "This military parade is a comprehensive display of the Party's ability to rule and of the overall might of the nation." Except for an especially invited audience, everyone else, though, was asked to stay home. President Hu Jintao inspected China's defense forces in Beijing on Thursday. "Greetings, comrades," Hu said as he saluted the troops, according to state-run Xinhua news agency. "Greetings, leader [i.e. ruler]," the soldiers responded.

The buoyant mood glosses over the country's gut wrenching twists - the ruinous campaigns of revolutionary leader Mao Zedong that left tens of millions dead - in 1989 after six weeks of heady demonstrations, the Tiananmen movement for freedom and democracy was brutally suppressed - as well as its current challenges: a widening gap between rich and poor, rampant corruption, severe pollution and ethnic uprisings in western areas of Tibet and Xinjiang. The Anarchist International calls for democracy and freedom in China, a movement of the system towards significant socialism and autonomy, away from the ultra-authoritarian left fascist system of today, and supports solidaric the people in China that fight for such a development.

23.12.2009. The Anarchist International: Release Liu Xiaobo immediately! A high-profile Chinese dissident accused of subversion was tried at a two-hour hearing Wednesday, a case that reflects the in the name only communist, in practice left fascist, government's deep suspicion of calls for political reform. Liu Xiaobo was detained a year ago, just before the release of an unusually direct appeal for more civil rights in China he co-authored called Charter 08, signed by scores of China's top intellectuals. He faces up to 15 years in jail. The verdict is due Friday. Anarchists, international human rights groups and Western nations have heavily criticized Liu's detention. Liu, 53, a literary critic and former professor, spent 20 months in jail for joining the 1989 student-led protests in Tiananmen Square that were crushed in a military crackdown. In his writings, most published only on the Internet, he has strongly called for civil rights and political reform. Liu is charged with inciting to subvert state power, a vaguely worded charge that is routinely used to jail dissidents and carries a penalty of up to 15 years in prison. Liu admitted "to practicing his freedom of speech, but did not admit to trying to overturn the state's power." The Anarchist International calls on the government of China to release Liu Xiaobo immediately! 25.12.2009. Liu Xiaobo has been jailed for 11 years by the ultra-authoritarian, totalitarian left fascist extremist regime in China, for so called "inciting subversion of state power". The Anarchist International condemns the trial for not being fair and being the opposite of social justice and again demands: Release Liu Xiaobo!

Cuba's place on the economic-political map

Cuba, with a) a degree of socialism at ca 52 1/4%, i.e. significant (and thus a degree of capitalism at ca 47 3/4%) and b) a degree of autonomy at ca 18% (and thus a degree of statism at ca 82%, i.e. very significant), and c) a libertarian degree of only ca 32,9% and thus an authoritarian degree of ca 67,1%, i.e. more than 666 per thousand authoritarian degree, is located in the state communist sector of the marxist quadrant of the economic-political map. Cuba is ranked as no 65 on the ranking of countries according to libertarian degree.

The Anarchist International supports 1. all libertarian tendencies in Cuba, 2. the fight for less authoritarian degree, 3. doing away with the communist regime, and 4. establishing anarchy. The AI also regularly receives information from the group Galsic Tribuna Latinoamericana, with address in France, that publishes the Bulletin Cuba Libertaria. At new year 2010 AI received the following e-mail: Adjunta va en archivo pdf esta edición especial del Boletín CUBA libertaria con la "Carta en rechazo a las actuales obstrucciones y prohibiciones de iniciativas sociales y culturales" en CUBA que hemos recibido para su difusión y para la cual recabamos tu apoyo. Saludos libertarios - GALSIC . Click on the link to the following pdf-file for more information: http://www.anarchy.no/cubalibertaria.pdf .

---

The situation in the Central Asian countries

Estimates of the libertarian degree etc. for the six Central Asian countries are found in the following table:

CENTRAL ASIAN COUNTRIES ACCORDING TO LIBERTARIAN DEGREE ETC

The estimates are approximately figures. (c) IIFOR/IJA ISSN 0800-0220, 2007 a.l.
For the ranking of countries according to libertarian degree in general, see http://www.anarchy.no/ranking.html .

All of the Central Asian countries have totalitarian, ultra-authoritarian, systems, with more than 666 per thousand authoritarian degree. All of these countries are significant statist, the degree of autonomy is less than 50%. Turkmenistan and Azerbaijan are also capitalist countries, located in the fascist quadrant of the economic-political map, see http://www.anarchy.no/a_e_p_m.html , Turkmenistan is a right-fascist country, while Azerbaijan is a left-fascist country. The four other countries are socialist, located in the state-communist sector of the marxist quadrant of the map. Not much have changed since the Soviet era. As a rule of the thumb, a gini-index above 35,0 indicates capitalism. Kazakhstan, the least authoritarian of the countries, has a small anarchist group, Almaty Liberta . No anarchist groups are known by IIFOR in the other even more authoritarian countries.

Kyrgyzstan had elections late in 2007: Kyrgyz President Kurmanbek Bakiyev's party has won a resounding victory in the country's general elections. But foreign monitors say the poll failed to meet international standards. Mr Bakiyev's Ak Zhol party has won every parliamentary seat, with no other party able to secure the necessary distribution of votes. Opposition groups have accused Mr Bakiyev of a power grab, and a move towards authoritarianism. Mr Bakiyev called the snap election after voters approved plans to revise the constitution in an October referendum. Turnout in the polls was reported at more than 60%, and Mr Bakiyev praised the elections as a "historic day" for the former Soviet nation. But in a statement the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) criticized the polls. "The 16 December parliamentary elections in Kyrgyzstan failed to meet a number of OSCE commitments," it said."Overall the election represented a missed opportunity and fell short of public expectations."

Pluralism undermined : Mr Bakiyev insists the new system agreed during the referendum - whereby MPs are elected on a party-list basis - will give the people more power and help end two years of upheaval. But the OSCE has criticized the new electoral system on the grounds that it could "defeat the objective of proportional representation and might lead to an endless cycle of elections." The official in charge of the OSCE mission in Kyrgyzstan, Kimmo Kiljunen, said: "Political pluralism, which I have seen develop, is undermined by this missed opportunity". The OSCE was also critical of the role of the media in the election, particularly the state broadcaster, saying it "did not provide adequate and balanced information for voters."

Historic day: Only one other party, Ata Meken, cleared the 5% threshold needed to gain seats in parliament. But while it gained 9.2% of the votes, Ata Meken was unable to reach a requirement to take 0.5% of the vote in each of Kyrgyzstan's seven regions, and its two main cities. The opposition says the poll was hit by irregularities including the stuffing of ballot boxes, bribery and intimidation. Ata-Meken's deputy leader Kubatbek Baibolov accused the government of "flagrant fraud", the French news agency AFP said. Sunday's poll was the first parliamentary vote since 2005, when allegations of a rigged ballot led to mass protests that drove then President Askar Akayev from power and gave Mr Bakiyev the top job. Since then, the country has been hampered by a political stand-off between the president and parliamentary deputies elected during the Akayev era. The BBC's Natalia Antelava says that many people in Kyrgyzstan want an end to continued street protests and government in-fighting. But leaving strong opposition outside the government could prove to be a dubious recipe for stability.

---

Qatar and other Arab countries on the economic-political map

With Arab countries we mean the 22 members of the Arab Leauge. The main goal of the League is to "draw closer the relations between member States and co-ordinate collaboration between them, to safeguard their independence and sovereignty, and to consider in a general way the affairs and interests of the Arab countries." The Arab Leauge is the main fascist organization of today, with four moderate fascist systems, and eighteen totalitarian fascist systems, with more than 67% authoritarian degree.

Qatar is the least authoritarian Arab country. Ruled by the al-Thani family since the mid-1800s, Qatar transformed itself from a poor British protectorate noted mainly for pearling into an independent state with significant oil and natural gas revenues. During the late 1980s and early 1990s, the Qatari economy was crippled by a continuous siphoning off of petroleum revenues by the Amir, who had ruled the country since 1972. His son, the current Amir Hamad bin Khalifa al-Thani, overthrew him in a bloodless coup in 1995. In 2001, Qatar resolved its longstanding border disputes with both Bahrain and Saudi Arabia. Oil and natural gas revenues enable Qatar to have a high GDP per capita, 31 558 US $ (2005). For 2007 it is estimated to $ 75 900 PPP, and $ 86 600 at current exchange rate, one of the worlds highest. This contributes to lower the degree of capitalism, but the income-distribution is significantly uneven. The unemployment rate was as low as 0.7% (2007). All in all this is significantly a capitalist country, the degree of capitalism is estimated to 59,5 %. Ethnic groups are Arab 40%, Indian 18%, Pakistani 18%, Iranian 10% and other 14%. Religion: Muslim 77.5%, Christian 8.5%, other 14% (2004 census) . It is ranked as no 40 on the UN's Human Development Index of 2005.

Government type is emirate, a form of  monarchy headed by the Amir, but not without tendencies of democracy, say, the constitution was ratified by a public referendum on 29 April 2003, and endorsed by the Amir on 8 June 2004, made effective on 9 June 2005. Legal system based on Islamic and civil law codes, discretionary system of law controlled by the Amir although civil codes are being implemented. Islamic law dominates family and personal matters. Legislative branch is a unicameral Advisory Council or Majlis al-Shura.  The constitution provides for a new 45-member Majlis al-Shura; the public would elect two-thirds of the Majlis al-Shura; the Amir would appoint the remaining members; preparations are underway to conduct elections to the Majlis al-Shura. The Council of Ministers is appointed by the monarch.  In April 2007, Qatar held nationwide elections for a 29-member Central Municipal Council (CMC), which has limited consultative powers aimed at improving the provision of municipal services; the first election for the CMC was held in March 1999.  There are however no political parties. The degree of statism is estimated to 65,4 %, clearly a statist country. Thus the authoritarian degree is estimated to 62,5 % and the libertarian degree 37,5 %, ranked as no 47 of countries according to libertarian degree.  It is thus not a totalitarian system with more than 67% authoritarian degree, but  rather authoritarian. It is located to the left in the populist sector of the fascist quadrant on the economic-political map, thus it is a left populist regime, moderate fascism. Similar systems, but a bit more authoritarian are in the United Arab Emirates, ranked as no 48 of countries according to libertarian degree, with ca 37,4 % libertarian degree, Bahrain 49 (ca 37,3%) and Kuwait  50 (ca 37,2%).

The other Arab countries are totalitarian fascist states, with less than 33,33 % libertarian degree: Libya ranked as no 68 (ca 32,5% libertarian degree),  Oman 74 (ca 31,9%), Saudi Arabia 82  (ca 31,1%), Lebanon 84 (ca 30,9%), Tunisia 92 (ca 30,1%), Jordan 93  (ca 30%), Algeria 105 (ca 28,5%), Syria 108 (ca 28,2%), Occupied Palestinian Territories 110 (ca 28%), Egypt 122 (ca 26,7%), Morocco 127 (ca 25,8%),  Comoros 135 (ca 24,5%), Sudan 144 (ca 23,6%), Djibouti 152  (ca 22,8%), Yemen 154 (ca 22,6%), Mauritania 155 (ca 22,5%), Iraq 177 (ca 20,5%) and Somalia 186 ( ca 20%). Somalia with its rivaling polyarchy and heavy ochlarchy is the most authoritarian country in the world. These totalitarian fascist states have very little respect for human rights and are ruled very significantly from the top downwards to the boottom/grassroots, both economically and political/administrative. There are a marginal anarchist opposition in some of the countries, say Lebanon, Egypt and Morocco, but most of the oppositions are fundamentalist, islamist, fascist terrorist groups, even worse than the existing regimes. The Anarchist International supports human rights, including labor and womens' rights, and anarchist opposition, in these countries, and the AI-note "What anarchists are against and what they are for" is translated to Arabic by Arab anarchists, see http://www.anarchy.no/arabic.html , but it is a long way to go before anything close to anarchy can be achieved in these countries.

22.07.2009. Amnesty says Saudi terror fight plagued with abuse. Saudi Arabia is holding more than 3,000 people in secret detention and has used torture to extract confessions in its anti-terrorism crackdown since the Sept. 11, 2001 terror attacks, Amnesty International said in a report. The report criticized the international community for turning a blind eye to the kingdom's methods in its crackdown. Asked about the report, a Saudi Interior Ministry official, Abdulrahman Alhadlaq, said, "These are claims that have to be proven." "Our policies on human rights are very clear and the orders given are for prisoners to be treated with respect and according to international human rights principles," Alhadlaq said. "If anything happened, it would be an individual case and if it is brought to anybody's attention it will be dealt with."

---

THE ANARCHIST INTERNATIONAL
www.anarchy.no

The Anarchist International condemns Libyan dictator colonel Moammar Gadhafi's attempt to 'abolish' the Anarchy of Switzerland

Gadhafi [a.k.a. Gaddafi; Muammar al-Qaddafi] has asked the United Nations to 'abolish' Switzerland and share the land among its neighboring countries. The eccentric dictator has filed a motion with the UN saying the Alpine state should be wiped off the map and split among France, Italy and Germany. Gadhafi was set to present his bizarre plan when Libya took over the year-long presidency of the UN general Assembly on September 15 2009. He first mentioned his idea at the G8 summit in Italy in July. "Switzerland is a world mafia and not a state," he declared. It is true that Switzerland is not a state, but a confederation with a lot of direct democracy and an anarchy of low degree, but it is not an ochlarchy a.o.t. mafia. The degree of anarchy in Switzerland is about 53 %, and the authoritarian degree about 47%.

"It [Switzerland] is formed of an Italian community that should return to Italy, another German community that should return to Germany, and a third French community that should return to France", Gadhafi postulated. The Swiss Foreign Ministry described it as a single-minded campaign against Swiss interests. Swiss MP Christa Markwalder told the Swiss TV news programme 10 vor 10: "We are concerned that Libya will attempt to use its year-long presidency of the UN General Assembly to damage Switzerland's reputation." Relations between Switzerland and Libya crumbled after Gaddafi's son Hannibal, 33, and his pregnant wife were arrested in Geneva a year ago accused of assaulting a hotel chamber maid.

The Anarchist International condemns the Libyan dictator colonel Moammar Gadhafi's attempt to 'abolish' the Anarchy of Switzerland and his lies and smearstories that Switzerland is a mafia.  Dictator colonel Moammar Gadhafi is the ruler of a left fascist totalitarian system in Libya, a lawless ochlarchy where the boss is always right, with about  67,5 % authoritarian degree (32,5% libertarian degree), and he is lying about direct democracy in his country. The Anarchist International condemns both dictator colonel Moammar Gadhafi and his left fascist totalitarian system, and calls for protests and revolt against him and his system, and support for the Anarchy of Switzerland in this matter.

More information, see http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1210936/Now-Colonel-Gaddafi-wants-abolish-Switzerland-Dictator-files-bizarre-motion-U-N.html

The Swiss referendum suggesting a ban of minarets is condemned and declared not valid by the International Anarchist Tribunal and the Anarchist International

Anarchists are for real democracy, also direct democracy, i.e. voting not violating freedom and human rights interpreted in a libertarian way, see http://www.anarchy.no/anrights.html  . Swiss voters have supported a right populist (moderate fascist) referendum proposal to ban the building of new minarets, official results show 29.11.2009. More than 57% of voters and 22 out of 26 cantons voted in favour of the ban. The Swiss referendum suggesting a ban of minarets is clearly violating freedom and human rights and is thus condemned and declared not valid by the International Anarchist Tribunal and the Anarchist International. Nobody should pay attention to this unlawful referendum, a mockery of real democracy and direct democracy. Just build minarets, and let the right populists try pull them down, if they dare in front international condemnation! The authoritarian degree of the Swiss system, estimated to about 47%, may soon be adjusted up if the right populist tendency increases.

[ More information about the Swiss economic-political system, see "NORWAY AND SWITZERLAND: ANARCHIES OF LOW DEGREE", IJA 1 (37) , http://www.anarchy.no/ija137.html ]

---

The situation in Iran

Release the political prisoners in Iran! Do away with the fascist regime!

See (clik on) : http://www.anarchy.no/ija239.html

---

The situation in Georgia

A NOTE FROM THE
Anarchist International Embassy in Oslo
l'ambassade du monde libertaire
http://www.anarchy.no/embassy.html

After several days of protests, Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili has said that Presidential elections will now be held next January, however the state of emergency he imposed on Wednesday 07.11.2007 remains in force.  Demonstrations on Wednesday were brutally repressed by the authorities, leaving hundreds injured. The tremendous discontent in Georgia is a direct result of the misguided and failed policies of the government, which leaves no space for dialogue and has seriously undermined fundamental workers' rights. President Saakashvili must lift the state of emergency immediately, and ensure that human rights including the fundamental labor standards are fully respected.

At least one-third of the Georgian population lives below the poverty line, the official unemployment level is 16% (real unemployment is said to be considerably higher) and the pension is Euros 16 per month. Changes to the labor law mean that workers can be fired without any explanation or effective recourse, leading to widespread dissatisfaction over the government's performance. The labor laws are leading to fear and uncertainty amongst working people and their families, and the absence of social dialogue and basic rights and freedoms compounds this.  Unless Georgia fundamentally changes direction to become a stable democracy, and preferably a real democracy , i.e. anarchy, the situation will only get even worse. Again: The government of Georgia  must lift the state of emergency immediately and guarantee fundamental rights.

Regards ... Chargé d'affaires A. Quist of AIE

More information about the situation in Georgia, see (click on) http://www.anarchy.no/ija139.html

---

Ukraine on the economic-political map

by IIFOR 29.11.2008

Ukraine was the center of the first eastern Slavic state, Kyivan Rus, which during the 10th and 11th centuries was the largest and most powerful state in Europe. Weakened by internecine quarrels and Mongol invasions, Kyivan Rus was incorporated into the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and eventually into the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. The cultural and religious legacy of Kyivan Rus laid the foundation for Ukrainian nationalism through subsequent centuries. A new Ukrainian state, the Cossack Hetmanate, was established during the mid-17th century after an uprising against the Poles. Despite continuous Muscovite pressure, the Hetmanate managed to remain autonomous for well over 100 years. During the latter part of the 18th century, most Ukrainian ethnographic territory was absorbed by the Russian Empire. Following the collapse of czarist Russia in 1917, Ukraine was able to bring about a short-lived period of independence (1917-20), with a.o.t. a wide spread anarchist movement, but was reconquered and forced to endure a brutal Soviet rule that engineered two artificial famines (1921-22 and 1932-33) in which over 8 million died. In World War II, German and Soviet armies were responsible for some 7 to 8 million more deaths.

Although final independence for Ukraine was achieved in 1991 with the dissolution of the USSR, democracy remained elusive as the legacy of state control and endemic corruption stalled efforts at economic amd political progress and civil liberties. A peaceful mass protest, the "Orange Revolution" in the closing months of 2004, forced the authorities to overturn a rigged presidential election and to allow a new internationally monitored vote that swept into power Viktor Yushchenko. Yushchenko promised reforms, but little has happened. Subsequent internal squabbles in the Yushchenko camp allowed his rival Viktor Yanukovych to stage a comeback in parliamentary elections and become prime minister in August of 2006. An early legislative election, brought on by a political crisis in the spring of 2007, saw Yuliya Tymoshenko, as head of an "Orange" coalition, installed as a new prime minister in December 2007. Despite elections, Ukraine is far from a real democracy, it has considerable authoritarianism. (Remember also Adolf Hitler was democratically elected...) Ukraine is a democracy in the name only, it is in reality a totalitarian economic-political system, with no real autonomy for the people as opposed to the upper classes, and no real socialism.

Ukraine is bordering the Black Sea, between Poland, Romania, and Moldova in the west and Russia in the east. Environmental problems are: Inadequate supplies of potable water; air and water pollution; deforestation; radiation contamination in the northeast from 1986 accident at Chornobyl' Nuclear Power Plant. Average life expectancy at birth for the total population is 68.06 years. Ethnic groups are: Ukrainian 77.8%, Russian 17.3%, Belarusian 0.6%, Moldovan 0.5%, Crimean Tatar 0.5%, Bulgarian 0.4%, Hungarian 0.3%, Romanian 0.3%, Polish 0.3%, Jewish 0.2%, other 1.8% (2001 census). Literacy above 15 years of age is 99.4% (2001 concensus). The unemployment ratio is 2.3% officially registered; but there is a large number of unregistered or underemployed workers; the International Labor Organization calculates that Ukraine's real unemployment level is nearly 7% (2007 est.). Gininindex, offical estimate, is 29 (2003), 31 (2006), however widespread corruption indicates a real Gini-index above 35. In 2003 the GDP per capita at current exchange rate was estimated to 1 024 US $ and  the PPP at 5 491, according to UN statistics. In 2007 the figures were  3 028 and 7 000 according to the CIA-factbook. These figures, indicating an incredible growth rate, can hardly be trusted, but in any case the GDP per capita is relatively low, indicating low efficiency, a typical capitalist tendency.

Labor legislation incompatible with international standards remains in place. Interference intensified in 2007-2008 both on behalf of the employers and the authorities. Several anti-union discrimination were reported. Although the government has made an effort to resolve some past violations, further cases of harassment, intimidation and even physical assault of trade union activists were reported. Labor union members are often subject to pressure and discrimination. This includes dismissals, transfers, demotions and deteriorating trade unionists' working conditions.

The figures and other data are quite uncertain, but all in all indicating a system with large rank differences and somewhat less income differences, and it is relatively inefficient. The degree of capitalism is estimated to about 50,1% and the degree of statism is estimated to 82,6%, and thus the authoritarian degree is about 68,3%, and the libertarian degree about 31,7% . This is indicating a totalitarian left fascist system on the economic-political map. Totalitarian societies have systems with more than 66,7 % authoritarian degree. The system in Ukraine is however somewhat less authoritarian than in Georgia.

---

The Anarchist International Embassy in Oslo
l'ambassade du monde libertaire
http://www.anarchy.no/embassy.html

Yes - we have standards. USA however does not see the difference between
rotten brown economic-political apples and fresh apples

No membership in NATO for Georgia and Ukraine (brown)
from Antimilitarism - an anarchist approach
http://www.anarchy.no/ija238.html

Resolution unanimously decided upon by the
The International Anarchist Congress
The 10th Anarchist Biennial 29-30.11.2008

The AI and the AIE  have always, and still are, supporters of NATO-membership of Iceland, Norway, Denmark, etc., but at the same time have been against NATO and USA's support to fascist regimes as historically in Turkey, Greece, and Spain (Franco). The NATO and USA's support to Saakashvili's totalitarian right fascist regime in Georgia, with about 71,2% authoritarian degree, is a disgrace and must stop immediately. We declare no membership in NATO for Saakashvili's fascist regime in Georgia.  The totalitarian left fascist regime in Ukraine, with about 68,3 % authoritarian degree, is also too authoritarian for NATO membership. NATO should have no totalitarian regimes as members, i.e. with more than 66,7 % authoritarian degree.

We send the assurances of our greatests appreciations

Yours sincerely

Chargé d'affaires G. Johnson of AIE

---

The situation in Zimbabwe

Zimbabwe  has a powerful president  and a parliamentary system that is democracy only in the name, not in reality. The president is both the chief of state and head of government. Cabinet is appointed by the president, it is however responsible to the House of Assembly. Another part of parliament is the Senate. Ethnic groups are African 98% (Shona 82%, Ndebele 14%, other 2%), mixed and Asian 1%, white less than 1%. Compared to, say, Kenya, Zimbabwe has now less of tribal hierarchies, discrimination and conflicts. A life expectancy at birth at only 36,9 years (1.8 million living with HIV/AIDS, 2001 estimate) combined with a very repressive political/administrative system in general, contribute to a low degree of autonomy. However a relatively high adult literacy rate at about 90%, (Kenya has 73,6%)  according to African standards, contributes to increase the degree of autonomy. The economic-political system of Kenya however  works very significantly  from the top downwards to the bottom, grassroots, all in all very significantly vertically organized economical and political/administrative.

The gini-index  is estimated to ca 56,8  indicating it is very significantly a capitalist country (more capitalist than the USA with a gini-index at 40,8 and Kenya at 42,5). The system has however been quite efficient (which lower the degree of capitalism) according to African standards, with a relatively high GDP per capita measured in US $ at current exchange rate, but this is partly due to an articificial high official exchange rate. The real efficiency is thus difficult to tell. (In 2005 the gini-index was 50,1, but the efficiency has fallen. In 2001 the PPP GDP per capita was 2 443 US $, compared to 1 037 US $ for Kenya in 2003. In 2007 the PPP GDP per capita in Zimbabwe was as low as 500 US $) . Environmental problems: Deforestation; soil erosion; land degradation; air and water pollution; the black rhinoceros herd - once the largest concentration of the species in the world - has been significantly reduced by poaching; poor mining practices have led to toxic waste and heavy metal pollution, also contribute to a high degree of capitalism.

The degree of capitalism is estimated to ca 78,5 %  (ca 21,5% socialism) and the degree of  statism is estimated to ca 76,1 % (degree of autonomy is ca 23,9 %), and thus the libertarian degree is estimated to ca 22,7% (the authoritarian degree is ca 77,3%). The system is all in all clearly  totalitarian, located in the ultra-fascist sector of the fascist quadrant of the economic-political map, see  http://www.anarchy.no/a_e_p_m.html . Zimbabwe is no 153 on the ranking of countries according to libertarian degree, see http://www.anarchy.no/ranking.html . In comparision Kenya has a libertarian degree at 20,3% (the authoritarian degree is ca 79,7%), and is ranked as no 181. These structural estimates are mostly based on the UN-HDI statistics from 2005, with data from 2003. At present the system of Zimabwe is probably even more authoritarian, closer to 80% authoritarian degree, and the country is probably among the 20 worst of countries with respect to libertarian degree. Even if the opposition comes into position in Zimbabwe it will take many years to make the system significantly less authoritarian.

Under government pressure, court denies bail to union leaders adopted as Amnesty International prisoners of conscience

IIFOR, the Anarchist International (AI) and the International Workers of the World (IWW/AI) criticize a Magistrate's decision on 12 May to keep labor confederation activists Lovemore Matombo and Wellington Chibebe in detention in Harare Remand Prison until 23 May.  The decision followed threats made by the Mugabe regime to overrule the court's decision if it granted bail to the union leaders, President and General Secretary respectively of the Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions (ZCTU). Matombo and Chibebe have been adopted by Amnesty International as prisoners of conscience. The two were arrested and interrogated for six hours, after voluntarily attending a police station on 8 May after armed police raided their homes. The arrests arise from May Day speeches made by Matombo and Chibebe.Yet again, the Mugabe regime is showing blatant disregard for the rule of law and fundamental labor rights enshrined in International Labour Organisation Conventions. The international anarchist movement condemns this latest act of aggression by the Zimbabwean authorities, which is intended to keep Robert Mugabe and his close cohort of hardline supporters in power in defiance of the will of the Zimbabwean people.

General Secretary of the Progressive Teachers' Union of Zimbabwe (PTUZ) arrested

16.05.2008 - Pressure is high for labor activists in Zimbabwe. Raymond Majongwe, the General Secretary of the Progressive Teachers' Union of Zimbabwe (PTUZ) and a member of the General Council of the ZCTU, has been arrested while ZCTU President Lovemore Matombo and Secretary General Wellington Chibebe are still in detention. Raymond Majongwe was apprehended by the police at the High Court of Zimbabwe in Harare today while he was attending the bail hearing of Lovemore Matombo and Wellington Chibebe. According to the information received, his arrest might be linked to PTUZ material concerning the violence and harassment of teachers at their workplaces during the current wave of political violence in the country.

Zimbabwe has an obligation to include a representative of the most representative workers' organization in this country to the 97th session of the International Labour Conference beginning on 28 May 2008. As the leaders of the ZCTU, the most representative international labor organization in Zimbabwe, Lovemore Matombo and Wellington Chibebe should be freed in order that they may fulfill their role as part of the Zimbabwe delegation. The international anarchist movement is monitoring the situation in Zimbabwe very closely, and calls for the immediate release of all detained trade unionists.

We IIFOR, AI and IWW/AI in this letter (e-mail) to the Ministry of Foreign Affaires of Zimbabwe and the Embassy in Stockholm, strongly urges President Mugabe to immediately release Mr. Lovemore Matombo, Mr. Wellington Chibebe and Raymond Majongwe and drop all charges against them.

Regards P. Johansen for IIFOR, A. Quist for AI and L. Jakobsen for IWW/AI

Reply from USUN

From: USUN, Public Affaires
To: IIFOR
Sent: Friday, May 16, 2008 10:57 PM
Subject: RE: Zimbabwe on the economic-political map. Release Matombo, Chibebe and Majongwe and drop all charges against them.

Thank you for sharing your concerns:

The United States remains troubled by election irregularities and growing incidents of reported violence and intimidation in Zimbabwe by state security forces and ruling party supporters against regime opponents.

The elections of March 29 underscore our grave cause for concern.  Based on publicly posted results, it is clear that the people of Zimbabwe voted overwhelmingly for change.  The Zimbabwe Electoral Commission must release the presidential election results and ensure their veracity in a transparent manner. 

Reports from our embassy in Harare cite unacceptable incidents of violence and intimidation, particularly in the rural areas.  These attacks appear to target individuals who voted for opposition party candidates.  Additionally, the government has imposed a ban on all rallies and demonstrations, which provide further evidence that the regime once again exerts a chokehold on Zimbabweans' basic right to constructively express justifiable grievances. Such brutality and coercion is unacceptable and has no place in a democratic society.

We call upon the government and all other parties to desist from violence and intimidation, act with restraint, respect human rights and allow the electoral process to continue unfettered.  We will hold accountable those responsible for violence.  We commend the Zimbabwean people for their patience during these delays and strongly urge that their views and democratic preferences be accurately reflected in the outcome of the elections.

Thank you again for your active interest and engagement on this issue tremendous of global importance.  For more on the United States Mission to the United Nations, please visit www.usunnewyork.usmission.gov .  

Respectfully,
United States Mission to the UN
Office of Press and Public Diplomacy

Labor activists granted bail, but denied right to adress "political gatherings"

19.05.2008 - Zimbabwean High Court Judge, Justice Ben Hlatshwayo today granted Z$20 billion bail each to two Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions (ZCTU) leaders' who were are facing charges of "inciting the public to rise against the government and communicating falsehoods".  The judge's decision comes after a Harare Magistrate, Olivia Mariga, had on Monday 12 May 2008, kept ZCTU President Lovemore Matombo and ZCTU General Secretary Wellington Chibebe in detention claiming that they were not suitable for bail. As part of the conditions for granting bail, Justice Hlatshwayo said the two were being barred to "address any political gathering until this matter is finalized". They were also ordered to reside at their given home addresses and not to "interfere" with any state witnesses.

We welcome the decision to grant bail to the two ZCTU leaders, however the decision to forbid them to attend "political gatherings" as a condition of their bail is completely unacceptable. The ZCTU leaders were charged with inciting people to rise against the government and falsehoods after they told workers gathered at Dzivaresekwa Stadium on May 1, 2008 that people were being killed during the current wave of political violence in the country.

The two ZCTU leaders were arrested after they presented themselves to the police on Thursday 8 May 2008 where they were initially interrogated for more than six hours before charges were laid against them. They had availed themselves to the police after armed police had visited their residences searching for them. The leaders were held at Harare Remand Prison. The High Court Judge heard the bail application on Thursday 16 May 2008, but deferred the verdict to today. The matter will be heard on 23 May 2008 at Harare Magistrate's Courts. The international pressure in this matter has probably worked, and we are keeping up the pressure.

23.05.3008 - The trial of Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions' (ZCTU) President Lovemore Matombo and Secretary-General Wellington Chibebe was today scheduled for 23 June by the country's High Court, after the union leaders provided proof that they were scheduled to attend the ILO's International Labour Conference which runs from 28 May to 13 June in Geneva. The two remain barred from addressing any political gathering.

IIFOR, AI and IWW/AI have also expressed support for a campaign to end violence in Zimbabwe and show solidarity with its people. The campaign will be launched at a series of national events in Africa and elsewhere on Africa Day, 25 May, when people are being asked to "Stand Up For Zimbabwe".

23.06.2008 - International criticism is mounting on Zimbabwe after opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai pulled out of a presidential run-off because of pre-poll violence. Saying he could not ask his voters to risk their lives, Morgan Tsvangirai pulled out of the race, a move that seemed intended to force action from other nations and organizations. We strongly urge UN and other actions over president Robert Mugabe's illegitimate regime.

The trial of Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions (ZCTU) President Lovemore Matombo and Secretary General Wellington Chibebe, scheduled for a hearing today, has been delayed by a week.  The two labor activists, charged with "communicating falsehoods" and "inciting the public to rise against the government", appeared today at Harare Magistrates' Court only to find that the magistrate expected to hear the case, and the state prosecutor, were absent. After several hours wait, another magistrate took up the matter and postponed the hearing until 30 June.

Labor confederations in southern Africa and several other countries protested to Zimbabwe embassies today over the trial of Matombo and Chibebe, as the crisis in Zimbabwe deepened and MDC opposition candidate Morgan Tsvangirai withdrew from the presidential election.  

The MDC cited a campaign of violence and terror by the Zimbabwean military and militia aligned with the ruling party of Robert Mugabe.  According to the MDC, some 3,000 militia bases have been set up around the country to stop the opposition's election campaign through beatings and intimidation, the opposition is being denied media coverage by the authorities, and a series of steps have been taken by Mugabe's ZANU-PF Party to exert total control over the election process.  Some 200,000 Zimbabweans are believed to have been displaced during the latest round of violence, and around 2,000 MDC officials and members are believed to be currently in detention.

Citing the dozens of politically-motivated killings, ZCTU General Council members meeting last Friday stated that the level of violence has reached "alarming if not catastrophic proportions" and declared that the ZCTU "would not accept the outcome of a flawed election".

The U.N. Security Council has unanimously condemned the Zimbabwean government because of violence that has marred the campaign leading up to a scheduled presidential election runoff, which forced the withdrawal of the opposition candidate from the race. Tsvangirai took refuge at the Dutch Embassy in Zimbabwe's capital, Harare on Sunday night. The council's statement - issued late Monday - questioned the legitimacy of any election held under such circumstances but did not directly call for the runoff, scheduled for Friday, to be postponed. Earlier, U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon made that appeal, saying the vote runoff as currently scheduled "would only deepen divisions within the country and produce a result that could not be seen as credible."

24.06.2008 - Zimbabwean opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai says he will leave the Dutch embassy in Harare in the next 48 hours. He said the Dutch ambassador had received assurances from the Zimbabwe authorities about his safety. Meanwhile, an African election observer said torture was "the order of the day" in Zimbabwe.

ANC 'dismayed' by Zimbabwe crisis: South Africa's governing ANC party has accused the Zimbabwean government of "riding roughshod" over democracy and said a fair election is not possible. This is the strongest statement so far by the ANC on Zimbabwe and a sign of mounting diplomatic pressure on its government. The ANC said it was "deeply dismayed by the actions of the Zimbabwean government - which is riding roughshod over hard-won democratic rights". It said it could not remain "indifferent to the flagrant violation of every principle of democratic governance". And the party referred to "compelling evidence of violence, intimidation and outright terror". The comments come a day after the UN Security Council unanimously agreed to condemn the violence in Zimbabwe and said a fair election would be "impossible". Coming from South Africa - the most powerful country in the region - the ANC statement is a further sign of President Mugabe's growing isolation. Zimbabwe's opposition is hoping neighbouring countries will put pressure on President Robert Mugabe to step down. In the past they supported him. How are relations now? 

South Africa's President Thabo Mbeki is the key Zimbabwe mediator. He has refused to criticize Robert Mugabe but the ruling ANC and trade unions have urged him to take a stronger line. Zambian President Levy Mwanawasa has taken the region's strongest line on Zimbabwe. He says Zimbabwe is a regional "embarrassment". Angola's President Jose Eduardo dos Santos is one of Robert Mugabe's closest allies - they fought colonialism together in the 1970s. He has urged Mr Mugabe to stop the violence. Botswana has summoned a Zimbabwean envoy to complain about the political violence. It has been supportive of Zimbabwe's opposition. Namibia is a close ally of Zimbabwe - it, too, is planning to redistribute white-owned farms to black villagers. It has not criticized the election violence. Mozambique has hosted some white farmers forced from Zimbabwe and is seen as relatively sympathetic to Zimbabwe's opposition. Tanzania's ruling party has a long history of close ties to Robert Mugabe's Zanu-PF party and its foreign minister has condemned the violence. DR Congo's President Joseph Kabila is an ally of Robert Mugabe, who sent troops to help his father, Laurent Kabila, fight rebels. Malawi is seen as neutral. But some 3m people of Malawian origin are in Zimbabwe, mostly farmworkers who have lost their jobs and were often assaulted during farm invasions.

25.06.2008 - Zimbabwean opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai called Wednesday for armed international peacekeepers to secure a new presidential election in the country where violence has marred a runoff set for this week. "We do not want armed conflict, but the people of Zimbabwe need the words of indignation from global leaders to be backed by the moral rectitude of military force," Tsvangirai wrote in Wednesday's edition of the British newspaper The Guardian. "Such a force would be in the role of peacekeepers, not troublemakers. They would separate the people from their oppressors and cast the protective shield around the democratic process for which Zimbabwe yearns." Tsvangirai  said also Zimbabwe would "break" if the world did not come to its aid.

Southern African leaders will hold an emergency meeting in Swaziland's capital Mbabane on Wednesday to discuss the crisis in Zimbabwe, officials said.The Mbabane meeting has been called by the leading regional body, the Southern African Development Community (SADC), amid mounting international pressure on Mugabe to resolve his country's political turmoil and economic meltdown. The leaders of Tanzania, Angola and Swaziland would attend the meeting in their capacity as the SADC's troika organ on politics, defense and security, the Tanzanian government said in a statement. "Others who have been invited to attend the meeting are the current SADC chairman, [ President] Levy Mwanawasa of Zambia, and the SADC mediator for Zimbabwe, [President] Thabo Mbeki of South Africa," said the statement. "The meeting will discuss how the SADC and its troika organ on politics, defense and security can help Zimbabwe to get out of its current state of conflict."

The Zimbabwe Electoral Commission ruled later on Wednesday that Friday's presidential runoff will proceed as planned despite the withdrawal of opposition candidate Morgan Tsvangirai, according to the panel's chairman. "The commission met today to deliberate on the contents and letter [from] Tsvangirai," Election Commission Chairman George Chiweshe told reporters at a news conference. "It was unanimously agreed that withdrawal was well out of time and for that reason, the withdrawal was of no legal force." Despite his withdrawal, Tsvangirai's name will remain on the ballots because they are already printed, the commission said. Tsvangirai has however made it clear he does not participate in the election. He returned to the Dutch Embassy after leaving briefly Wednesday and holding a news conference at his home. It was the first time he had left the embassy since Sunday, when he arrived there seeking refuge. Tsvangirai has said he would be open to a range of political options -  including a postponed election under "acceptable" conditions or a negotiated transition of power. At his news conference Wednesday, the MDC leader made four demands: - The violence must stop immediately; - Emergency humanitarian organizations must be allowed to operate freely and without hindrance throughout the country; - All political prisoners must be freed immediately; and - Parliament and Senate must be sworn in and begin working on the people's business. He called on international leaders to intervene, specifically the African Union and the Southern African Development Community, a regional body of 14 southern African nations.

Tsvangirai also has as mentioned asked the United Nations to send a peacekeeping force to Zimbabwe. The United Nations has not responded to his request, he said Wednesday, asking the international body to "urgently" consider it. Nobel peace laureate Desmond Tutu labeled Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe "Frankenstein" and called for other countries to intervene before the country descended into bloodshed. Former South African President Nelson Mandela called the violent political crisis "a tragic failure of leadership." The Southern African Development Community (SADC) warned that the violence in Zimbabwe may "undermine the credibility and legitimacy" of the runoff, and the group urged Zimbabwean authorities to "consider" postponing it.

On Wednesday morning, the British newspaper The Guardian published an editorial it said was penned by Tsvangirai that called the situation in Zimbabwe, see above. But later Wednesday, Tsvangirai denied having written it and said that although "credible sources" had told The Guardian he was the author, "this was not the case." "An article that appeared in my name, published in the Guardian ... does not reflect my position or opinions regarding solutions to the Zimbabwean crisis," he said.

26.06.2008 - The anarchists, anarcho-syndicalists included, strongly support Tsvangirai's position. - Mugabe rejects poll delay calls. Zimbabwe's President Robert Mugabe has brushed aside last minute calls for Friday's disputed presidential run-off election to be postponed or called off. Amid continuing violence on its supporters, the MDC has as mentioned withdrawn from the contest. However, MDC leader Morgan Tsvangirai said his supporters should vote rather than face violent reprisals. The government blames the MDC for the violence, and on Thursday the police accused Britain and the US of backing MDC plans to disrupt Friday's voting. MDC secretary-general Tendai Biti went free on bail Thursday after more than two weeks behind bars.

27.06.2008 - Zimbabweans vote under threat of violence. Zimbabweans in a Harare township were being forced to vote by members of Robert Mugabe's ruling ZANU-PF party in Friday's presidential runoff election.  People in Harare's Mbare township were being told that they would be removed from their homes if they didn't vote. Early reports from some polling stations seemed to indicate low voter turnout. The vote comes three months after Mugabe finished second to Morgan Tsvangirai, leader of the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC), in the initial ballot. Tsvangirai scored nearly 48 percent of the vote to the president's 43 percent. The MDC has said at least 86 of its supporters have been killed, 10,000 wounded and 200,000 displaced. Robert Mugabe is the sole candidate in the election, and will thus win. The European Union dismissed the vote as a "sham" and the US and Germany say the UN will consider sanctions. The anarchists agree with EU that the election is a sham.

28.06.2008 - Mugabe 'preparing to be sworn in'. Robert Mugabe is expected to be sworn in as Zimbabwe's president on Sunday, following his victory in an election boycotted by the opposition candidate. Government sources say Mr Mugabe has won by a huge margin in the vote, which has been widely condemned as a sham. Reports suggest a large number of spoiled ballot papers. President Bush today called Zimbabwe's runoff presidential election a "sham" and said he would push for additional sanctions against the country's government.

29.06.2008 - Robert Mugabe has been sworn in for a new five-year term as Zimbabwe's president after election officials declared a landslide victory for him. The ceremony took place at Mr Mugabe's State House residence in the capital Harare. Results showed Mr Mugabe won 85% of the vote, but many ballots were spoiled. Official results were: Robert Mugabe: 2,150,269; Morgan Tsvangirai: 233,000; Spoiled ballots: 131,481; Voter turnout: 42.37% - Source: Zimbabwe Electoral Commission. Mr Mugabe is expected to fly to Egypt to attend an African Union summit which opens on Monday. Speaking on the BBC's Andrew Marr programme, former Archbishop of Cape Town, Desmond Tutu, said that African Union leaders should refuse to recognize Robert Mugabe as legitimate president of Zimbabwe. "If you were to have a unanimous voice, saying quite clearly to Mr Mugabe... you are illegitimate and we will not recognize your administration in any shape or form - I think that would be a very, very powerful signal and would really strengthen the hand of the international community." Tutu said. The anarchists support Tutus point of view and do not recognize Mugabe as legitimate president.

02.07.2008 - No AU sanctions. This week's African Union summit in the Egyptian resort of Sharm el Sheikh was dominated by the problems of Zimbabwe. Coming just three days after the country's highly controversial second-round vote, this was Robert Mugabe's first international appearance since being re-elected president. In public, most of his colleagues simply ignored him, but behind closed doors he was obliged to sit and listen to trenchant criticism of the way he had been returned to power. Delegates who attended the closed debate said that Mr Mugabe was given the chance to respond to the criticisms, which he did at considerable length. He must have been persuasive, since the resolution which emerged at the end of the session was as favourable as he could have wished. It expressed concern about the criticism by observer groups of the conduct of the elections, but did not pronounce them illegitimate. It made no mention of any sanctions against Mr Mugabe's government, only encouraging the parties to honour their commitment to participate in dialogue, and supporting the call for a government of national unity. It also warmly endorsed the role of intermediary held by South African President Thabo Mbeki. The African Union proceeds by consensus, not majority vote, and there was clearly no consensus for any kind of sanctions.

15.07.2009 - Tsvangirai seeks wider mediation. Mr Tsvangirai reiterated his earlier claim that Zimbabwe was under the control of a military junta as reports of violence continue. The MDC leader said the Joint Operations Command (JOC) - a committee of Mr Mugabe's military chiefs - was running the country. He again called for more African Union (AU) input at talks aimed at forming a unity government after disputed polls. South African mediators want the two sides to start full negotiations before the head of African Union Commission Jean Ping visits Pretoria later this week. The opposition says it will not enter full talks until the violence stops.

16.07.2008 - Inflation etc. Official figures show that inflation has soared to an annual rate of 2,200,000%. The prospect of wider international sanctions that probably would have forced Mr Mugabe's Zanu-PF's government to deal with the opposition was derailed by Russia and China. Last week, Russia and China vetoed a resolution at the UN Security Council to impose targeted sanctions on Mr Mugabe and 13 of his allies. South Africa said sanctions would interfere with attempts to form a national unity government. The MDC says 113 of its supporters have been killed, some 5,000 are missing and more than 200,000 have been forced from their homes since the first round of voting in March. The anarchists strongly condemn the bloody ochlarchy of the military dictatorship.

17.07.2008 - Zimbabwe faces new EU sanctions. European Union member states will agree on Tuesday to impose tougher sanctions against Zimbabwe, diplomats have said. They are set to increase the number of officials and businessmen associated with President Robert Mugabe subject to visa bans and financial sanctions. The anarchists support the sanctions.

18.07.2008 - A group of senior diplomats are to help South African President Thabo Mbeki in his efforts to solve Zimbabwe's political crisis. Envoys will be drawn from the UN, African Union (AU) and the Southern African Development Community (Sadc). In a statement, Mr Tsvangirai welcomed the "appointment of a reference group of eminent Africans who will work with President Mbeki and the main parties in Zimbabwe to find a peaceful negotiated solution to the Zimbabwean crisis".

21.07.2008 - President Robert Mugabe and opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai have signed a deal outlining a framework for talks on Zimbabwe's political crisis. It says that talks on a power-sharing arrangement should be completed within two weeks of its signing. Discussions will focus on security, and the political and economic priorities of the new government. Under the terms of the agreement, each party will be expected to do everything possible to stop all forms of political violence and refrain from making inflammatory statements.

17.10.2008 - Zimbabwe power-sharing talks fail. Zimbabwean opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai has said he has failed to agree on a new cabinet at power-sharing talks with President Robert Mugabe. After a fourth day of negotiations in the capital, Harare, Mr Tsvangirai said he and Mr Mugabe had agreed to refer the dispute to the Sadc regional group. Reuters quoted him as saying that "we have failed to agree on the allocation of ministerial positions". Earlier, the state-owned media accused the MDC leader of blocking the talks. The US meanwhile said it would consider further sanctions against Mr Mugabe and his government if the deal collapsed. The Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs, Jendayi Frazer, said she was not optimistic that talks aimed at breaking a deadlock on how cabinet posts should be handed out would be successful. The talks in Harare are being mediated by the former South African President, Thabo Mbeki.

30.01.2009 - Zimbabwe's opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai has said his party will join a unity government with President Robert Mugabe's Zanu-PF next month. The deal, proposed by Southern African leaders, would see Mr Tsvangirai sworn in as prime minister on 11 February. A power-sharing accord between his MDC (Movement for Democratic Change) and Zanu-PF was signed last September, but got mired in ever more bitter disputes. Zimbabwe is enduring rampant inflation and an escalating food crisis. Meanwhile the World Health Organization (WHO) says an outbreak of cholera, fuelled by the collapse of infrastructure, has now infected 60 000 people and killed more than 3 000. Donors have said they would only provide aid once a unity government is in place. Among others the anarchists and USA are a bit sceptical about the deal: "What's important here is actions and not words, and we want to see real, serious power-sharing by the Mugabe regime. So we think the jury is still out on this one."

11.02.2009 - Opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai was sworn in as prime minister of Zimbabwe Wednesday as part of a new unity government that Zimbabweans hope will signal an end to the political and economic crises that have gripped the nation for months. Attendees applauded as Mugabe administered the oath of office to his once-bitter rival. Zimbabweans and outsiders alike are hopeful the new government will help heal the country's crippling economic crisis and eroding humanitarian situation, both seen as the worst since the once-prosperous nation gained its independence from Great Britain in 1980. A cholera epidemic has claimed close to 4,000 lives and infected about 65,000 people since August, aggravated by a lack of water treatment chemicals and a problem with waste disposal in much of the country. The United Nations says more than 5 million people are in need of food aid, in a country that has shortages of all essentials, including fuel, electricity and cash. The shortages have created a fertile environment for inflation. The country recorded the highest level of inflation in the world in July, at 231 million percent. The cabinet is due to be sworn in on Friday. The various ministries will be shared between the MDC and Mugabe's ZANU-PF, with the former given 13 and the latter 15. "Thus Mugabe still has most of the power, and the mismanagement will probably continue with only minor improvements", the anarchists say.

14.02.2009 - Zimbabwe's new prime minister blamed the arrest of one of his top aides on factions trying to destroy the country's coalition government. Morgan Tsvangirai said he would meet with President Robert Mugabe later Saturday to discuss the arrest of Roy Bennett, who was due to be inaugurated as deputy minister of agriculture in the coming week. Bennett was detained by police Friday while Tsvangirai and Mugabe were presiding over the inauguration of senior cabinet ministers. Bennett's arrest illustrates the deep gulf of mistrust Mugabe's ZANU-PF party and Tsvangirai's Movement for Democratic Change must bridge. A pro-Mugabe newspaper reported Saturday that Bennett was arrested because of an alleged plot from 2006 to overthrow Mugabe, resurrecting a long-discredited claim. Potential Western donors want to see a stable government implementing necessary financial reforms before they will provide economic support.

15.02.2009: Zimbabwe treason case dropped. Charges of treason against Zimbabwean politician Roy Bennett have been dropped, and replaced with other allegations, his party says. But Mr Bennett remains in custody. The MDC has described Mr Bennett's detention as "scandalous" and "politically motivated", and called for him to be released unconditionally and unharmed. A white farmer who lost his property under Mr Mugabe's land reform programme, Mr Bennett was imprisoned from October 2004 to June 2005. The sentence was imposed by other MPs after he pushed a minister during an argument in parliament over land reform. He recently returned to Zimbabwe after more than two years in South Africa, where he fled after police sought his arrest in connection with an alleged plot to kill Mr Mugabe. The latest charges would appear to be linked to this alleged plot. On Saturday Mr Tsvangirai said Mr Bennett's arrest was undermining the spirit of the power-sharing agreement. Mr Bennett is one of more than 30 MDC supporters and other activists who have been detained over the past couple of months. 16.02.2009 Bennett is set to spend another night in jail after prosecutors failed to show up at court. He is now accused of conspiring to acquire arms with a view to disrupting essential services, according to his lawyer, Trust Maanda, charges Mr Bennett denies. Release the MDC supporters, the anarchists demand.

09.04.2009: Mugabe aides use violence to gain amnesty. President Robert Mugabe's top lieutenants are trying to force the political opposition into granting them amnesty for their past crimes by abducting, detaining and torturing opposition officials and activists, according to senior members of Mr. Mugabe's party. To protect themselves, some of Mr. Mugabe's lieutenants are trying to implicate opposition officials in a supposed plot to overthrow the president, hoping to use it as leverage in any amnesty talks or to press the opposition into quitting the government altogether, ruling party officials said. Mugabe's lieutenants, part of an inner circle called the Joint Operations Command, know that their 85-year-old leader may not be around much longer to shield them, and they fear losing not just their power and ill-gotten wealth, but also their freedom, officials in the party said. Like South Africa at the end of apartheid or Liberia at the close of Charles Taylor's reign, Zimbabwe is in the midst of a treacherous passage from ultra-authoritarian rule to an uncertain future.

Justice Minister Patrick Chinamasa, one of Mr. Mugabe's principal negotiators in the power-sharing talks, informally told opposition officials around the time that the transitional government took office in February that his party wanted an amnesty, according to a senior ZANU-PF official close to the talks."We wanted to find out if it would be possible to have amnesty dating back to 1980s," the official said. "The M.D.C. did not sound very forthcoming." Indeed, the opposition has so far offered no such assurances. "I'd rather rot in hell than agree to anything like that," said Roy Bennett, the opposition's third-highest ranking official. He was recently released on bail after being held for almost a month on terrorism charges. He was first implicated by a man whose doctor and lawyer say was tortured and forced into giving a false confession. The anarchistst say a clear no to amnesty for these ultra-authoritarian ochlarchists and criminals of ZANU-PF.

23.04.2009. Alarm over intimidation of witnesses to ILO inquiry. The Anarchist International has expressed alarm over reported intimidation of potential witnesses to an International Labor Organization Commission of Inquiry by Zimbabwe's notorious Central Intelligence Organization (CIO).  The Commission, a high-level procedure of the UN agency which deals with labor issues, was initiated due to the appalling track record of the Mugabe regime on labor rights, which has singled out the country's trade union movement for especially forceful repression over a period of several years. Potential witnesses to the Inquiry have been approached by CIO operatives, seeking to intimidate them in order to stop them testifying to the Inquiry.  One trade unionist was detained by the CIO and subjected to threats.  Following this person's release, they were shadowed by unidentified persons.

A pattern of harassment and intimidation is emerging, and the Anarchist International has genuine fears for the safety of the potential witnesses.  The regime, or rogue elements under its direct responsibility, appears to be trying to undermine the conduct of this highly important Inquiry.  It must stop doing so immediately, and the international community must take the steps necessary to ensure that those concerned are able to testify without fear for their own safety or that of their families and colleagues. The International Workers of the World agrees with the Anarchist International in this matter.

05.05.2009. Zimbabwe activists jailed again. Zimbabwe human rights campaigner Jestina Mukoko has been ordered back to jail for plotting to topple President Robert Mugabe, her lawyer said. Ms Mukoko is among 18 leading activists to be detained just two months after they were released on bail. The activists say they were tortured into making false confessions. The party of Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangirai has warned that the move could threaten the future of Zimbabwe's power-sharing government. The Anarchist International demands release of the activists.

16.10.2009. Zimbabwe PM boycotts unity government. Citing the "persecution" of a top aide, Zimbabwe's prime minister abandoned - at least temporarily - shared rule with President Robert Mugabe, marking a setback to the country's struggle to emerge from political gridlock, economic collapse and international isolation and sanctions. PM Morgan Tsvangirai told reporters Friday his party members would not attend Cabinet meetings or engage in other executive work with Mugabe's party. His erstwhile governing partners said good riddance, even though both sides need the coalition. "Until confidence has been restored we can't continue to pretend that everything is well," Tsvangirai said, referring to a trial scheduled to begin Monday against Roy Bennett, the prime minister's nominee for deputy agriculture minister who is charged with weapons violations. The charges are linked to long-discredited allegations that Tsvangirai's Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) plotted Mugabe's violent overthrow. "We are not really pulling out officially," Tsvangirai said, assuring a press conference that his move did not spell the collapse of the government, but making clear his party members would not attend Cabinet meetings or engage in other executive work with Mugabe's ZANU-PF party. The MDC will continue parliament activities. Friday's move demonstrates deep unhappiness within the MDC with the coalition. But Tsvangirai has repeatedly said he sees the coalition as the only way to ensure Zimbabwe's future. The indifferent reaction from Mugabe's ZANU-PF party underlined tensions within the coalition. "If MDC wants to disengage ... we don't have a problem with that," said Ephraim Masawi, a ZANU-PF spokesman. "We were having problems with MDC, working together. We have been trying but it was not easy."

Tsvangirai and Mugabe as mentioned entered the unity government in February after two violence-plagued elections left the country at a political standstill and in economic ruin. Zimbabwe's neighbors had urged Mugabe, who has held power since independence in 1980, to form the partnership with Tsvangirai, a former labor leader. In forming their coalition, the longtime opponents pledged to work together to turn around the country's economic and political collapse. Since the coalition was formed, Tsvangirai has condemned continuing human rights violations. Mugabe has demanded that Tsvangirai do more to get international sanctions lifted and foreign aid and investment restored. Tsvangirai had nominated Bennett as deputy agriculture minister in the coalition. Bennett was arrested the day the Cabinet was sworn in in February. He denies the charges against him. Bennett had been free on bail since March, but that was revoked earlier this week. "Roy Bennett is not being prosecuted, he is being persecuted," Tsvangirai said.

The coalition is Mugabe's only hope for taking Zimbabwe out of international isolation, and it has brought Tsvangirai closer to power than any election. Foreign governments and multilateral donors have expressed support for Tsvangirai, warmly welcoming him on a recent international tour. But concerns persist about propping up Mugabe, accused of trampling on democracy and ruining a once prosperous economy. Even with Tsvangirai in the government, donors prefer not to give money directly to Zimbabwe's treasury, instead working through independent aid groups. Last month, the European Union said it would not remove sanctions targeting Mugabe and his loyalists or resume development aid until Mugabe does more to make power sharing work and restore human rights. Bennett's lawyers persuaded a Harare High Court judge on Friday to restore bail, but officials where he is being held in Mutare, 170 miles (270 kilometers) east of the capital, are not expected to act on the order before Monday. The European Union said Thursday it is "deeply concerned" over Bennett's jailing. The bloc added it regrets "that politically motivated abuse persists in the country." In Washington Thursday, U.S. State Department spokesman Robert Wood told reporters that the case against Bennett is a "blatant example of the absence of the rule of law in Zimbabwe." The Anarchist International condemns the persecution and arrest of Roy Bennett and similar criminal acts against other MDC activists, and supports MDC's boycott of the unity government.

Regards P. Johansen for IIFOR, A. Quist for AI and L. Jakobsen for IWW/AI

---

Men, we have a problem - CGT (Spanish anarchosyndicalists)

HOMBRES, TENEMOS UN PROBLEMA

LUCHAR CONTRA LA VIOLENCIA MACHISTA ES COSA DE TODOS

by CGT (SPANISH ANARCHOSYNDICALISTS, 04.10.2007)

¡Esto tiene que acabar! ¡Hasta aquí hemos llegado!! Es insoportable ver cómo cada semana son asesinadas mujeres por sus parejas o exparejas. Y no son sólo los asesinatos: es intolerable que todavía tantas mujeres sigan siendo agredidas, sometidas, acosadas, discriminadas, ninguneadas, y permanecer indiferentes, callados o, a lo sumo, algo preocupados. Las mujeres, en su vida cotidiana, continúan sufriendo discriminaciones y abusos a manos de los hombres y el nivel de tolerancia social que aún existe hacia estos comportamientos nos parece inaceptable.

Estas injusticias afectan a todos los ámbitos de la vida: trabajo, riqueza, poder, tiempo libre, sexualidades, cuidados, etc. Estos problemas para las mujeres no son ‘cosas de ellas': tienen su raíz en nuestros comportamientos, sostenidos en una estructura social que todavía encarna, pese a los cambios, las tradicionales relaciones de poder entre hombres y mujeres. Luchar contra esta situación no es sólo un asunto de ellas: es un imperativo ético para cualquiera. No habrá verdadera democracia mientras no exista verdadera igualdad en todos estos ámbitos.

Es hora, por tanto, de denunciar a los hombres que asesinan a las mujeres. Pero también a aquellos que se empeñan en creerse superiores a las mujeres y ejercen como tales; y, además, denunciar y cuestionar en nosotros los comportamientos inconsecuentes en que incurrimos.

Nos denunciamos y ahora exigimos. Exigimos a los poderes públicos, empresas, asociaciones, partidos, que se cuestionen y asuman su parte de responsabilidad en la transmisión de valores que reproducen el modelo social que origina la violencia. Es evidente que algo va mal.

Y ante esta situación, ¿qué hacemos?, ¿cambiamos? Pues sí. Si nos pensamos íntegros, justos, democráticos, no queda opción. Tenemos que escuchar las justas reivindicaciones de las mujeres que están luchando y construyendo un mundo sin violencia y comprometernos con ellas. Dejemos de creernos superiores, rompamos la complicidad con los hombres que ejercen violencia. Y, cómo no, erradiquemos nuestros propio machismo y trabajemos en todos nuestros espacios vitales para construir otros modelos de convivencia.

Os pedimos, por todo ello, que participéis y nos ayudéis a denunciar y a erradicar la violencia machista.

MANIFESTACIÓN ATOCHA-PLAZA JACINTO BENAVENTE

SÁBADO 20 DE OCTUBRE, 19:00H

CONVOCA:

UNA ASAMBLEA DE HOMBRES CONTRA LA VIOLENCIA DE GÉNERO

***

MEN, WE HAVE A PROBLEM.  

MEN, WE MUST ABOVE ALL FIGHT AGAINST THE SEXIST VIOLENCE .

This has to finish!  To here we have arrived!!  It is unbearable to see how each week women are murdered by their couples or others.  And they are not only the murders: it is intolerable that still so many women continue being attacked, submitted, hounded, discriminated, ignored, and to remain indifferent, quiet or, at the maximum, something worried.  The women, in their everyday life, they continue suffering discriminations and abuses by hand of the men and the level of social tolerance that still exists toward these behaviors seems unacceptableto us.

These injustices affect  all the environments of life: work, wealth, to be able, free time, sexualities, cares, etc.  These problems for the women are not 'things of them' : It has its roots in the behaviors, maintained in a social structure that still embodies, despite the changes, the traditional relations between men and women.  Fighting against this situation is not only a matter of them: It is an imperative ethical one for everybody.  There will not be true democracy while there exist not true equality in all these environments. 

It is hour, therefore, to denounce the men that murder the women.  But also to those that are impelled in being believed over the women and they exercise as such; and, besides, to denounce and to question our the inconsistent behaviors in which we incur.  We denounce us and now we require. 

We require to the public powers, businesses, associations, parties, that this problem must be questioned, and that they assume their part of responsibility in the broadcast of values that reproduce the social model that originates the violence. It is evident that something goes badly.  And before this situation, what do we do?,  - we change?  Well yes.  If we think integral, just, democratic, that this does not remain an option. 

We have to listen to the just demands of the women that are fighting and building a world without violence, and to associate with them.  Stop believing we are superiors, we break the complicity with the men that exercise violence.  And, how not, we eradicate our own machoism and we work in all our living spaces to build other models of contact. 

We ask you, everybody, to participate and help us to denounce and to eradicate the sexist violence. 

DEMONSTRATION AT PLAZA JACINTO BENAVENTE SATURDAY 20 OF OCTOBER, 19:00H, IT CALLS: 
AN ASSEMBLY OF MEN AGAINST THE VIOLENCE OF ALL KINDS

---

En la Brecha (In the Gap) - CNT-AIT 12.10.2007

News from Spanish anarchosyndicalists 12.10.2007

CNT Sagunto (españa)

Conflicto con la empresa "Agostense" CNT de Alicante  (11-10-2007)
Levante CNT

Reflexiones Sociológicas La farsa democrática y el encubrimiento de un gran engaño (Artículo de opinión de un Militante de CNT de Sagunto) http://www.cnt.es/sagunto/index_archivos/Page601.htm

Charla: Otoño Libertario 2007: "El Anarquismo frente a la crisis ambiental"
Ponente Raúl. CNT Salamanca. Madrid. Locales de CNT en Madrid. Tirso de Molina, nº5-2ºizq. Metro: Tirso de Molina. L-1, el 14-10- 07 a las 19:00hs. CNT-AIT Madrid. http://www.klinamen.org/article3125.html

AIIS ANARCHIST INTERNATIONAL INFORMATION SERVICE www.anarchy.no From http://www.anarchy.no/a_nor.html
AIIS Anarquista internacional de servicios de información www.anarchy.no Desde http://www.anarchy.no/a_nor.html

correo recibido (12/10/07)

Jornada Anarcofeministas en Extremadura, que se celebrarán los días 12,13 y 14 de Octubre, inscripciones/info tfno: 659293365 - 605576844 cntcaceresnorte@hotmail.com . campamento de "Las Castellanas", Pasarón de la Vera. 14-10- 2007 a las 00:00hs.
CNT Cáceres Norte

ALTERCOM comunicación para la libertad (12/10/07) Comienza la ingobernabilidad y la revuelta social en el país más estable de Centroamérica. www.altercom.org/article152093.html

Despedidos 140 trabajadores magrebíes a tres días de terminar la recolección y a un día de terminar el Ramadán.
Secretariado Permanente Comité Regional CNT Extremadura  (11-10-2007) http://www.cnt.es/noticia.php?id=3439

El pasado 27 de septiembre se presentó la biografía de Fermin Salvochea.
CNT de Cádiz  (11-10-2007) http://cntsovcadiz.blogspot.com/2007/10/el-pasado-27-de-septienbre-se-present.html

19 DE SEPTIEMBRE 2007 Comunicado de prensa de la FAU-AIT (11/10/07) L@s trabajador@s de la fábrica de bicicletas ocupada de Nordhausen, en Turingia, han retomado la  producción en régimen de autogestión. http://www.strike-bike.de La historia de la ocupación: http://www.labornet.de/branchen/sonstige/fahrzeug/bikesystems.html

Supresión del turno de tarde. Sección sindical de CNT Madrid en Correos y Telégrafos  (11-10-2007)
http://www.cnt.es/correos-madrid/supttarde.htm

Sección sindical de Correos y Telégrafos de C.N.T. Madrid Os enviamos el nuevo solidaridad postal correspondiente al mes de octubre,
Y con el enlace de nuestra pagina Web para que lo deis la mayor difusión (9/10/07)
posible http://www.cnt.es/correos-madrid/solidaridadpostal42.htm

Compartimos nuestra declaración de la Red de Mujeres indígenas sobre biodiversidad (9/10/07)
http://consejoautonomoaymara.blogspot.com/ http://seminariominasantipersonales.blogspot.com/

Estimadas amigas, estimados amigos: aquí estamos nuevamente con las  Novedades Nº 167 del Sitio Biodiversidad en América Latina http://www.biodiversidadla.org (9/10/07)

desde México_Magdalena Gómez 12 de octubre: ¿qué celebrar? (9/10/07) http://www.jornada.unam.mx/2007/10/09/index.php?section=opinion&article=020a1pol

Ante todo desde CNT Sagunto estamos de acuerdo que este día es el día de un genocidio
XXII Encuentro Nacional de Mujeres: Talleres temáticos y contenidos (9/10/07)
Por Comisión Organizadora - Córdoba, Argentina adhesiones/comunicaciones: 
prensa22encuentrocordoba@yahoo.com.ar http://agendadelasmujeres.com.ar/index2.php?id=3&nota=4482

CNT Sagunto (españa)
www.cnt.es/sagunto
camp_de_morvedre@cnt.es
En la brecha
http://www.cnt.es/sagunto/index_archivos/EnlabrechaCNT.htm

---

Anarchist protest against the pope

The conclusion is that pope Benedict XVI is a fascist rightwing extremist with equal to or more than 666 per thousand authoritarian degree, a real beast

by AI 04.11.2007. Updated

Pope Benedict has beatified 498 Roman catholic clerics killed during the Spanish Civil War and revolution in the 1930s. Beatification is the penultimate step before sainthood in the Roman catholic church. The priests, monks and nuns were killed in a campaign by left-wingers and anarchists -- but the pope has said there was no political motive in the decision to honour them. He said they died in defence of their faith. This of course is not true - this is a clear support for the Franco terrorist fascist dictatorship. The pope has already canonised two priests and three nuns. One priest, Pedro Poveda, was killed in 1936 during the opening days of the Spanish Civil War. The church says 4,184 clergy were killed during the war by the government side, which accused the church of backing General Franco, which is in general true. These killings are  regrettable, but the Vatican supported the Franco-regime all of the time it existed, and this is continued support. Down with the pope, he supports fascism. We protest against this reactionary move from the pope.

24.01.2009. Pope Bendedict XVI has blessed and rehabilitated the holocaust denier bishop Richard Williamson. It is more and more clear that pope Bendedict XVI is a fascistoid person with equal to or more than 666 per thousand authoritarian degree, a real beast. The pope has the authority to speak "infallibly", that anarchists see as a joke. This idea was set in stone in 1870, though it had been debated for far longer. We protest against this reactionary move from the pope.

31.01.2009. Pope Benedict has also made a controversial appointment, days after revoking the excommunication of the bishop who is a Holocaust denier. He promoted ultra-conservative cleric Fr Gerhard Maria Wagner to assistant bishop of the Austrian city of Linz. Fr Wagner is also notorious for his extreme views - he has accused the popular Harry Potter novels of spreading Satanism, and described Hurricane Katrina as God's punishment for the sinners of New Orleans. He wrote in a parish newsletter that the death and destruction caused by the hurricane in New Orleans was divine retribution for the city's tolerance of homosexuals and permissive sexual attitudes. The future bishop said he was glad that Katrina destroyed not only nightclubs and brothels in New Orleans, but also five of the city's abortion clinics. The catholic church in Austria has been losing support in recent years after its former head was sacked as a result of a scandal involving gay priests in a teaching college. Austrian catholics gave only a lukewarm welcome to the pope when he visited Vienna in 2007.

04.02.2009. Police investigate Holocaust-denying bishop. A German district attorney said he had launched a criminal investigation against Richard Williamson. Regensburg District Attorney Guenther Ruckdaeschel said authorities are investigating whether the remarks by bishop Richard Williamson can be considered "inciting racial hatred." Denying the Holocaust is a crime according to the German criminal code and punishable by up to five years in prison. Ruckdaeschel says he launched the investigation January 23 after learning about an interview Williamson gave to Swedish Public Broadcasting. In the interview, Williamson denied the Nazis had used gas chambers at concentration camps. "I believe that the historical evidence is strongly against -- is hugely against -- 6 million Jews having been deliberately gassed in gas chambers as a deliberate policy of Adolf Hitler," Williamson said in the interview, which also appeared on various Web sites after broadcast. "I believe there were no gas chambers." Williamson apologized last week for the "distress" his remarks caused the pope, but did not retract them. Williamson and three other bishops who belong to the ultra-conservative Society of Saint Pius X were excommunicated by pope John Paul II in 1988. The society was founded by archbishop Marcel Lefebrve, who rebelled against the Vatican's modernizing reforms in the 1960s, and who consecrated the men in unsanctioned ceremonies. Vatican spokesman Father Federico Lombardi said the Vatican's decision to accept Williamson was part of its desire to normalize relations with the ultra-conservative group, and had nothing to do with the bishop's personal views.

Later the Vatican has ordered bishop Williamson to publicly recant his views denying the Holocaust. A statement said bishop Richard Williamson must "unequivocally" distance himself from his statements to serve in the Roman catholic church. The Vatican also said that the pope had not been aware of the bishop's views when he lifted excommunications on him and three other bishops last month. Earlier, a senior cardinal acknowledged the Vatican had mishandled the issue. It is almost unheard of for a pope to admit publicly that he has made a mistake. But that is in effect the significance of the urgent statement put out by the Vatican."Bishop Williamson, in order to be admitted to the Episcopal functions of the church, must in an absolutely unequivocal and public way distance himself from his positions regarding the Shoah [Holocaust]," it said. It said bishop Williamson's positions on the Holocaust were "absolutely unacceptable and firmly rejected by the Holy Father". The Vatican's statement on Wednesday also said that the society must recognize the reformist Vatican II Council of 1962-65 and the popes who followed it. So the pope is not speaking "infallibly" after all, but gives in to pressure from anarchists and many others, the anarchists say. 06.02.2009. So far bishop Williamson has not responded...

07.02.2009.  The Vaticans secretary of state, Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, has said Williamson will not be allowed to perform priestly functions if he does not recant. Williamson made clear he does not plan to comply immediately, and rejected a suggestion that he might visit the Auschwitz death camp, the weekly Der Spiegel reported. Williamson replied: "I will not go to Auschwitz". "Since I see that there are many honest and intelligent people who think differently, I must look again at the historical evidence," the British bishop was quoted as saying. "It is about historical evidence, not about emotions," he added, according to the report. "And if I find this evidence, I will correct myself. But that will take time." Williamson has not repudiated his comments, in which he also said only 200,000 to 300,000 Jews were killed during World War II and none was gassed. "I was convinced that my comments were right on the basis of my research in the '80s," Der Spiegel quoted Williamson as saying. "I must now examine everything again and look at the evidence. Germany's catholic bishops are calling for the expulsion of Williamson. So far the pope has not responded to Williamsons's latest move.

12.02.2009. The pope has still not responded to Williamson's latest move, but said Thursday the catholic church is "profoundly and irrevocably committed to reject all anti-Semitism." He also reiterated his commitment to the groundbreaking catholic rejection of the centuries-old claim that the Jews killed Jesus. "Nostra Aetate marked a milestone in the journey towards reconciliation, and clearly outlined the principles that have governed the church's approach to Christian-Jewish relations ever since," Benedict said. Jewish reactions to the pope's speech were broadly, but not uniformly, positive.

15.92.2009. Wagner asks the pope to take back the promotion to assistent bishop. Pope Benedict XVI's recent appointment of the conservative Rev. Gerhard Maria Wagner, 54, to auxiliary bishop in Linz, Austria's third largest city, sparked an outcry among catholics who warned it could prompt people to leave the church. "Regarding the fierce criticism, I am in prayer and, after consulting the diocesan bishop, I have decided to ask the Holy Father in Rome to take back my promotion as auxiliary bishop," Wagner said in a statement released by Linz Diocesan Bishop Ludwig Schwarz. So the pope is not speaking and promoting "infallibly" after all, the anarchists say.

24.02.2009. The British bishop Williamson was expelled from Argentina Tuesday after scuffling with a reporter at the airport. A local television station showed Richard Williamson raising his fist and shoving a reporter into a pole as he hurried to catch a flight for London. Argentina's government on Thursday ordered the traditionalist, ultra-fascist, catholic bishop to leave the country or face expulsion for failing to declare a job change as required by immigration law. The order also cited his denials of the Holocaust, which the government called "an insult" to humanity. The Anti-Defamation League also found records of embarrassing speeches and letters by Williamson when he was based earlier at a seminary in Winona, Minnesota, USA. He was quoted in one 1989 speech as saying that "Jews made up the Holocaust, Protestants get their orders from the devil and the Vatican has sold its soul to liberalism." He also expressed that "the Jews created the Holocaust so we would prostrate ourselves on our knees before them and approve of their new state of Israel." So far Williamson has not disavowed his comments.

Williamson's conservative Society of St. Pius X however, did distance itself from Williamson's views, and removed him as head of its seminary near Buenos Aires. Argentina, which has Latin America's largest Jewish population, announced that Williamson departed on a flight to London Tuesday. Images broadcast on Buenos Aires' Todo Noticias television showed Williamson - wearing a baseball cap, a black fleece jacket and dark sunglasses - hurrying through the airport as television reporter Norberto Dupesso moved alongside to ask a question. Williamson, his lips tightly pursed in a grimace, raised a clenched fist inches from Dupesso's face, then pushed past, shoving Dupesso into a pole with his shoulder. Two men accompanying the bishop then grabbed Dupesso by his shoulders and held him back while Williamson hurried away. 25.02.2009. Bishop Williamson has arrived back in his native Britain. Last week Richard Williamson was given 10 days to leave Argentina where he had been working for the past six years. The catholic pope has been invited to Britain by the British PM. He will probably go to Britain a.o.t. to visit his friend bishop Williamson. 26.02.2009. Bishop Williamson has apologized "before god" for the mess he has created, but so far not publicly recanted his views.

An old anarchist word of wisdom says, "tell us who your friends are, and we can tell what you are". The pope's friend Williamson tell us a bit about the pope's political tendency. The catholic pope is perhaps not ultra-fascist as Williamson, but still with equal to or more than 666 per thousand authoritarian degree, a real beast..., says Anarchon, AI's spokesperson in such matters, also called "the real pope in Rome", an anarchist alternative to the catholic pope, with less than 50 % authoritarian degree. Our aim is to create heaven on earth, says Anarchon. The catholic pope and his friend Willamson contribute to create hell on earth.

27.02.2009. The Vatican has rejected the apology by bishop Williamson. It said the bishop needed to "unequivocally and publicly" withdraw his comments, adding that he must repudiate his views if he wants to be a Roman Catholic clergyman. The statement by Bishop Richard Williamson "doesn't appear to respect the conditions" the Vatican set out for him, said the Rev. Federico Lombardi, a spokesman for the pope. As mentioned Williamson apologized for his remarks on Thursday upon his arrival in his Britain. He said he would never have made them if he had known "the full harm and hurt to which they would give rise." But he didn't say he had been wrong or that he no longer believed what he had said. On Friday, German Justice Minister Brigitte Zypries said Germany could issue a European-wide arrest warrant on hate crimes charges for Williamson since the Swedish TV interview was conducted in Germany.

01.03.2009. The catholic pope has probably got bad conscience for blessing the holocaust denier Williamson, a blessing he has not withdrawn. Now the pope attempts to pose as progressive: Pope Benedict XVI is encouraging political leaders and industrialists to make workers and their families the priority during the economic crisis. Benedict spoke to pilgrims in St. Peter's Square Sunday. Fiat autoworkers from southern Italy, worried about the future of their factory, were in the crowd. The pope says he wants to encourage political leaders as well as industrialists to work together during what he calls a "delicate moment." He says strong, joint efforts are needed, but that they must keep in mind that the priority must be workers and their families. But he does not fool the anarchists. "Strong, joint efforts" by the workers - the people - seen as a class in contrast to the superiors in rank and/or income, and the upper classes, is typically fascism, something equal to, or more than, 666 per thousand authoritarian degree, and not something libertarian with equal to or less than 50 % authoritarian degree. The catholic pope sounds quite a bit like Mussolini, says Anarchon, the real pope in Rome.

07.03.2009. Anarchon declares: A sick church! Vatican backs abortion row bishop. A senior Vatican cleric has defended the excommunication in Brazil of the mother and doctors of a young girl who had an abortion with their help. The nine-year-old had conceived twins after alleged abuse by her stepfather. Cardinal Giovanni Battista Re told Italian paper La Stampa that the twins "had the right to live" and attacks on Brazil's Catholic Church were unfair. It comes a day after Brazil's president criticized the Brazilian archbishop who excommunicated the people involved. Brazil only permits abortions in cases of rape or health risks to the mother. Doctors said the girl's case met both these conditions, but the Archbishop of Olinda and Recife, Jose Cardoso Sobrinho said the law of God was above any human law. He said the excommunication would apply to the child's mother and the doctors, but not to the girl because of her age. Cardinal Re, who heads the Roman Catholic Church's Congregation for Bishops and the Pontifical Commission for Latin America, told La Stampa that the archbishop had been right to excommunicate the mother and doctors.

The abortion was carried out on Wednesday. Brazil's President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, himself a Catholic, said on Friday that he regretted what he described as the cleric's deeply conservative attitude. "The doctors did what had to be done: save the life of a girl of nine years old," he said. The girl, who lives in the north-eastern state of Pernambuco, was allegedly sexually assaulted over a number of years by her stepfather, possibly since she was six. The fact that she was four months' pregnant with twins was only discovered after she was taken to hospital in Pernambuco complaining of stomach pains. Her stepfather was arrested last week, allegedly as he tried to escape to another region of the country. He is also suspected of abusing the girl's physically handicapped 14-year-old sister. He is still welcome in the catholic church... This speak for itself, says Anarchon: The catholic church is sick! We call on all catholics to leave this church and join the Anarchist International and contribute to heaven on earth!

12.03.2009. The catholic pope complains about  "hostility" over Williamson. The pope wrote to all his bishops, talking of the "hostility and hatred" directed towards him for reinstating four traditionalists – including Williamson – who had made his controversial comments just days before. Vatican spokesman Father Federico Lombardi said: "The pope has defined the Williamson case as unforeseeable. The fact that it overlapped with his gesture on excommunication runs the risk of completely changing the sense of his decision." Williamson as mentioned said he believes there were no Nazi gas chambers. The pope's letter admitted mishandling the affair, and said that problems could have been predicted had the Vatican made more use of the internet to check background material. There was no mention in the letter of the case in Brazil, where a Roman Catholic bishop excommunicated several people for being connected with an abortion on a nine-year-old girl. The catholic pope is a typical case of totalitarian personality disorder, i.e. indicating he is a victim of mob rule, when the whole thing is entirely his own fault, and the criticism is matter of fact, says Anarchon.

17.03.2009. Pope Benedict XVI says condoms can make the AIDS problem worse. Pope Benedict XVI said condoms are not the answer to the AIDS epidemic in Africa and can make the problem worse, setting off criticism Tuesday as he began a weeklong trip to the continent. "You can't resolve it with the distribution of condoms," the pope told reporters aboard the Alitalia plane heading to Yaounde. "On the contrary, it increases the problem." Three-quarters of all AIDS deaths worldwide in 2007 were in sub-Saharan Africa, where some 22 million people are infected with HIV - accounting for two-thirds of the world's infections, according to UNAIDS.

Rebecca Hodes with the Treatment Action Campaign in South Africa said if the pope is serious about preventing HIV infections, he should focus on promoting wide access to condoms and spreading information on how to use them. "Instead, his opposition to condoms conveys that religious dogma is more important to him than the lives of Africans," said Hodes, head of policy, communication and research for the group. Hodes said the pope was right that condoms are not the sole solution to Africa's AIDS epidemic, but added they are one of the very few proven measures to prevent HIV infections. Anarchon agrees with Hodes and says: religious dogma is more important to the pope than the lives of Africans. The catholic pope contributes to AIDS, he contributes to mass murder! The pope's real aim is the consequences of his decisions, not some religious manifesto with good intentions. This confirms that the catholic pope has equal to or more than 666 per thousand authoritarian degree, i.e. he is a real beast..., says Anarchon.

Pope Benedict XVI called murderer at a demonstration in France

26.03.2009. The pope is dangerous because he has a lot of followers, says Anarchon: the pope is dangerous because he speaks "infallibly", is ultra-authoritarian with equal to or more than 666 per thousand authoritarian degree, and has a lot of followers that really listen to him and act accordingly! But not in the matter about sexual abstinence...

27.03.2009. Pope distorting condom science. One of the world's most prestigious medical journals, the Lancet, has accused pope Benedict XVI of distorting science in his remarks on condom use. It said the pope's recent comments that condoms exacerbated the problem of HIV/Aids were wildly inaccurate and could have devastating consequences. The pope had said the "cruel epidemic" should be tackled through abstinence and fidelity rather than condom use. The attack from Lancet was unprecedentedly virulent. The London-based Lancet said the pope had "publicly distorted scientific evidence to promote Catholic doctrine on this issue". It said the male latex condom was the single most efficient way to reduce the sexual transmission of HIV/AIDS. "Whether the Pope's error was due to ignorance or a deliberate attempt to manipulate science to support Catholic ideology is unclear," said the journal. But it said the comment still stood and urged the Vatican to issue a retraction. "When any influential person, be it a religious or political figure, makes a false scientific statement that could be devastating to the health of millions of people, they should retract or correct the public record," it said. "Anything less from Pope Benedict would be an immense disservice to the public and health advocates, including many thousands of Catholics, who work tirelessly to try and prevent the spread of HIV/AIDS worldwide." The article shows how far the pope's attempts to clarify the Vatican's position on condoms have backfired. The catholic pope should retract or correct his statement on condoms, Anarchon says.

02.04.2009. More Holocaust denials from catholic clergymen. The Brazilian archbishop Dadeus Grings, was quoted by Brazil's Press magazine last week as saying: "More Catholics than Jews died in the Holocaust, but this isn't known because the Jews control the world's media." Grings, who leads one of Brazil's largest dioceses and is the chancellor of the Catholic University of Rio Grande do Sul, has been criticized before for his views on the matter. In 2003 he argued that only 1 million Jews died in the Holocaust, although he backed away from that in an interview with The Associated Press this week, saying it "is evident that 6 million Jews were killed." However, he repeated the suggestion that Jewish media power was distorting the picture. 

"The incident involving Archbishop Grings, who has a history of Holocaust denial, marks the third time in as many months where a catholic clergyman has publicly denied or diminished the Holocaust," Anarchon says. Last month, as mentioned a British bishop was removed from leading a seminary in Argentina after claiming that only 200,000 to 300,000 Jews were killed in the Holocaust. That bishop, Richard Williamson, has so far not recanted. In January, Italian priest The Rev. Floriano Abrahamowicz was quoted in an Italian newspaper as saying "I know the gas chambers existed at least for disinfecting but not whether they caused deaths or not." 

"In claiming more catholics than Jews were killed, Grings was including catholics who died on the battlefields of World War II, whereas the Jews, the Gypsies, the communists, the anarchists and the handicapped were persecuted for being who they were - the bishop is mixing things that cannot be mixed." says Anarchon. 

According to most historians, the nazis slaughtered 6 million Jews and millions of other victims. Michael Berenbaum, a former director of the United States Holocaust Research Institute at the US Holocaust Memorial Museum, said the toll includes approximately 5 million non-Jews, among them large numbers in mainly Catholic Poland, Soviet prisoners of war, Gypsies, homosexuals, mental patients, political prisoners and other "undesirables." 

In 2003, Grings claimed in an essay published on a Brazilian Catholic Internet portal that only 1 million Jews died in the Holocaust, and that the Nazis were responsible for 22 million deaths overall. Asked to explain himself at the time, Grings told Folha de S. Paulo newspaper, Brazil's largest, that the figure of 6 million Jewish dead was unproven, and that "We Catholics were the main victims of the Holocaust." "The single ruler of the catholic church, the absolute monarch, the pope, is responsible," says Anarchon, the real pope in Rome: "This only confirms that the catholic pope is ultra-authoritarian with equal to or more than 666 per thousand authoritarian degree, a real beast."

23.04.2009. The conclusion is that the catholic pope Benedict XVI is a fascist rightwing extremist, with equal to or more than 666 per thousand (67%) authoritarian degree, a real beast, and contributes to hell on earth, says Anarchon, the real Pope in Rome. Anarchon contributes to heaven on earth, and that is why he is the real Pope in Rome.

Hans Küng, theologian: "The Catholic church is once again taking a course towards reaction, anti-modernism, and the middle ages." From an interview with Euronews published 07.04.2009

11.05.2009. The catholic pope's speech at Israel's national Holocaust memorial attracted attention in Israel, with the parliament speaker accusing Benedict of glossing over the Nazi genocide. Critics, including anarchists, said the pope referred to the millions of victims, but would have liked him to say the six million Jews. They also wanted him to mention Germans or Nazis, specifically, as opposed to his more general reference to the perpetrators. Newspapers lambasted him for failing to apologize for what many in Israel see as catholic indifference during World War II and the pope's own wartime actions - he served in the Hitler Youth corps and Nazi army - have also cast a shadow. "The pope spoke like a historian, as somebody observing from the sidelines, about things that shouldn't happen. But what can you do? He was part of them," said parliament speaker Reuven Rivlin. "Jews cannot ignore the fact that as a young German he served in Hitler's army that was an instrument of the extermination." 12.05.2009. The Vatican defended Pope Benedict XVI as a man of strong anti-Nazi credentials. The fact that Benedict XVI served in the Hitler Youth corps and Nazi army, explains a lot of his rightwing extremism, Anarchon says, however he is not so authoritarian as the Nazis.

20.05.2009. Significant child abuse in USA and Ireland confirms the ultra-authoritarian nature of the catholic church, says Anarchon. The Irish deputy prime minister has called the abuse of children in catholic-run institutions as one of the "darkest chapters" in Irish history. The catholic pope, the top ruler of the catholic church, has a responsiblity for the church's actions.

28.05.2009. Pope Benedict XVI has not commented on the massive child abuse done by his church in Ireland. Is he a closet pedophile? - says Anarchon.

04.06.2009. The coward pope Benedict XVI has still not commented on the massive child abuse done by his church. The anarchists are waiting for a comment ..., says Anarchon.

08.06.2009. Pope Benedict XVI was visibly upset to hear June 5 of the abuse suffered by thousands of Irish children in the care of religious congregations, reported the archbishop of Dublin, Ireland. Speaking at a June 8 press conference, Archbishop Diarmuid Martin said the pope was saddened to hear "how the children had suffered from the very opposite of an expression of the love of God." This is not a strong condemnation of the child abuse. If pope Benedict XVI does not strongly condemn the child abuse, he has more than 666 per thousand authoritarian degree, Anarchon says. It must be mentioned that the pope 'led cover-up of child abuse by priests', see http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-23369148-details/Pope+'led+cover-up+of+child+abuse+by+priests'/article.do .

17.06.2009. Vatican: Ordinations by Holocaust denier's group Society of St. Pius X  "valid but illicit." This is not a strong condemnation. If pope Benedict XVI does not strongly condemn the Holocaust denier, he has more than 666 per thousand authoritarian degree, Anarchon says. As mentioned in an interview with Swedish TV broadcast shortly before pope Benedict XVI was lifting the excommunication of Society of St. Pius X, bishop Williamson, member of Society of St. Pius X, denied that 6 million Jews were killed by the Nazis. He said about 200,000 or 300,000 were murdered and none were gassed. He later apologized for the "hurt" caused by his remarks, but he still has not recanted them. Pope Benedict XVI's Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith will now oversee planned theological talks with the nazistoid Society of St. Pius X in hopes of reabsorbing it into the church. The outcome will probably be ultra-authoritarian, with equal to or more than 666 per thousand authoritarian degree, Anarchon says.

25.06.2009. No big news from the catholic pope. Pope Benedict XVI seems to have more than 666 per thousand authoritarian degree, Anarchon says.

01.07.2009. Still no big news from the catholic pope. Pope Benedict XVI seems to have more than 666 per thousand authoritarian degree, Anarchon says. Thursday 18.06.2009 pope Benedict XVI called for a "frank and complete acknowledgment" of the "weaknesses" of priests. It was the pope's first statement on such matters since a state-appointed commission in Ireland last month reported "endemic" sexual and physical abuse in church-run residential schools there from the 1930s to the 1990s, when the last of the institutions closed. Benedict's letter to priests worldwide did not specifically acknowledge abuse scandals, but it spoke of "situations which can never be sufficiently deplored where the church herself suffers as a consequence of infidelity on the part of some of her ministers." This is not a strong and direct condemnation of the child abusers," Anarchon says. Since then pope Benedict XVI has been silent on the matter as far as AIIS knows...

26.11.2009. Irish church covered up abuse. A damning report into child abuse in the Dublin archdiocese has criticized the catholic church hierarchy for covering up the abuse. The report investigated how church and state authorities handled allegations of child abuse against 46 priests. It found that the Church placed its own reputation above the protection of children in its care. It also said that state authorities facilitated the cover-up by allowing the church to operate outside the law. The "Report of the Commission of Investigation into the Catholic Archdiocese of Dublin" covered a period from 1975 to 2004. It has laid bare a culture of concealment where church leaders prioritized the protection of their own institution above that of vulnerable children in their care. The report said the avoidance of public outrage, which would inevitably follow high-profile prosecutions, appeared more important than preventing abusers from repeating their crimes. Instead of reporting the allegations to civic authorities, those accused of horrific crimes were systematically shuffled from parish to parish where they could prey on new, unsuspecting victims. Thursday's report comes six months after the publication of the Ryan report in May, which took submissions from 2,000 people who said they had suffered physical and sexual abuse while in the care of Catholic-run institutions. As mentioned, the Ryan report, also known as the report of the Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse, found church leaders knew that sexual abuse was "endemic" in boys' institutions. The catholic pope, the top ruler of the catholic church, has a responsiblity for the church's actions. The anarchists are waiting for a comment from the catholic pope ..., says Anarchon.

08.12.2009. Papal Nuncio Archbishop Giuseppe Leanza expressed his shock at how Church and state authorities handled allegations of child abuse against 46 priests. "We feel ashamed about what happened, I must express again my shock, my dismay," said Archbishop Leanza. He met with Irish Foreign Affairs Minister Michael Martin on Tuesday. The Report of the Commission of Investigation into the Catholic Archdiocese of Dublin, published in November, looked at cases of abuse over a 30 year period. "I understand the anger of the people and the sufferings of those who have been abused," said Archbishop Leanza after the meeting. "We totally condemn this." The Papal Nuncio had been criticized by the commission for ignoring a request for information. The anarchists are waiting for a comment from the catholic pope himself..., says Anarchon.

19.12.2009. Suspected nazi-collaborationist Pope Pius XII on the way to be beatified by Pope Benedict XVI. Pope Benedict XVI moved two of his predecessors closer to possible sainthood Saturday, signing decrees on the virtues of Pope John Paul II and controversial Pope Pius XII, who has been criticized for not doing enough to stop the Holocaust. The decrees mean that both men can be beatified once the Vatican certifies that a miracle attributed to their intercession has occurred. Beatification is the first major step before possible sainthood. Anarchists, some Jews and historians have argued Pius should have done more to prevent the deaths of 6 million Jews by the Nazis and their collaborators during World War II. As a result, the German-born Benedict's surprise decision to recognize Pius' "heroic virtues" sparked immediate outcry from Jewish groups and anarchists. Anarchists, The Anti-Defamation League and American Jewish Committee declared the move was premature given the Vatican still hasn't opened up to outside historians its secret archives from Pius' 1939-1958 pontificate. The Vatican says the 16 million files won't be ready until 2014 at the earliest. Anarchon says it is regrettable that the Vatican acted before the documents are made available.

***

Altough the church in Spain is losing ground, the pope has still got influence on a lot of people there. Of course the fairy tales of sainthood actually means nothing to AI. But legitimating the Franco fascist regime, may give way to more reactionary policy in Spain. Thus it is worth while protesting. As far as we know no anarchist organization sanctioned anti-clerical actions, these were taken by ordinary people often as mobs just as attacks on other members of the ruling classes like industrialists, landowners etc. The CNT-FAI even went as far to arrest some who carried out these attacks including self-proclaimed anarchists. Attacks on priests were a mark of every Spanish popular uprising for centuries.

***

It might be good for anarchists to reflect on the mistakes of the past, and publicly acknowledge that we are opposed to the death penalty and to summary executions, and that some of these killings were acts of mob violence against symbols of a hated and oppressive social order.

And in defense of the pope, he is one of the few world leaders who has clearly and openly criticized the US for its occupation of Iraq, and has called for an immediate end to the violence there. (E. Stamm)

***

The Anarchist International is against capital punishment because it is authoritarian and barbaric. Killing someone, be it murder or capital punishment, is a very vertical relationship. AI's principle is "The general idea is that the people really concerned of a case should be the ones that decide, in a horizontal way...". You don't cure the authoritarian doing of a murderer, with an equal authoritarian act - capital punishment. A life sentence is less authoritarian. A society without capital punishment is thus less authoritarian, more libertarian, than a society with, other things equal. Innocent people have been sentenced to die. If we are to maintain capital punishment, we must accept that the execution of an innocent person will always be a possibility. This unacceptably compromises the justice system. And it show clearly that capital punishment is barbaric, as the barbaric law "An eye for an eye" ( lex talionis). The death penalty, for a majority of an ever growing number of countries and organizations, has clearly become a serious human rights violation. Abolishing capital punishment affords a unique opportunity to build on the spirit of human rights. The Anarchist International advocates more human rights, not less, see also article 3 at http://www.anarchy.no/anrights.html .

Anarchist protesta contra el Papa

Papa Benedicto ha beatificado 498 Católica Romana clérigos asesinados durante la guerra civil española y la revolución en la década de 1930. Beatificación es el penúltimo paso antes de la santidad en la Iglesia católica romana. Los sacerdotes, monjes y monjas fueron asesinados en una campaña por izquierdistas y anarquistas -- pero el Papa ha dicho no hay motivo político en la decisión de honor. Dijo que murieron en defensa de su fe. Esto por supuesto no es cierto, esto es un claro apoyo a la dictadura fascista de Franco terroristas. El Papa ya ha canonizado dos sacerdotes y tres monjas. Un sacerdote , Pedro Poveda, fue asesinado en 1936 durante el día de apertura de la Guerra Civil española. La iglesia dice 4.184 religiosos fueron asesinados durante la guerra por la parte gubernamental, que acusaron a la iglesia de respaldo General Franco, que es en general cierto. Estos asesinatos son lamentables, pero el Vaticano apoya el régimen de Franco, todo el tiempo que fuese, y esto es continuo apoyo. Abajo con el Papa, el orador apoya el fascismo. Protestamos contra esta reaccionaria pasar de la papa. (04.11.2007) [Translation to Spanish by CNT-AIT Sagunto (España)]

---

Anarcho materialism

by J. Geils 26.01.2010

I would dare say that 'not all anarchists' are materialists or nihilists as was pointed out in the critique of Obama's statement against the killer in Texas. As a a Tantric Buddhist and an anarchist I see very little problem with having a non-materialist view of reality in conjunction with varied anarchist principles. Actually, Buddhism is a non-theistic religion that promotes the individual and collective liberation of all beings from the bounds of suffering. In distinction to the common anarchist view, liberation in a Buddhist sense is liberation from the confines of dualistic perception (samsara) rather than just a political and/or economic liberation as promoted by many idealogues (of whatever camp). The impetus to be of benefit to beings is paramount in Tantric Buddhist practice and should be the over riding gestalt in the promotion of Anarchism.

Comment by A. Quist: Anarchists are not nihilsts, but in general, that is unless special cases, are philosophical materialists, but not dialectical materialists, i.e. marxists. Materialists think mind is an advanced form of matter. A few anarchists are christian, buddhists or have another religion. We have already some in the Anarchist International (AI) network, and you are very welcome to participate. In my early days I was an anarchist and buddhist, but I am now an atheist with a very small dash of agnosticism, as most anarchists. The buddhist idea of reincarnation has no real scientific support, buddhism is also a bit dogmatic, and nirvana seems to be a bit dull, that is why I left buddhism. But you of course have different meanings. See also ANARCHISM VS MYSTICISM AND SATANISM ETC. at http://www.anarchy.no/apt.html  for the general AI-policy on the matter.

---

Anarchism vs "anarcho"-capitalist "law and order"

by H. Fagerhus 01.12. 2007 updated

"Regarding law and order a combination of private security firms and a horizontally organized public sector with anarchist courts on local, regional and confederal level, it is the best solution. Some law and order services are collective or semicollective and they will most efficiently be handled by a horizontally organized public sector. Competing court services sold for means of payment will be significantly corrupt and not making equality before the law. It will be "law and order" for the relatively rich, they will have it their way, and no real law and order for the relatively poor." Quoted from http://www.anarchy.no/oslo_conv.html .This is proven beyond reasonable doubt in the following text:

Bryan Caplan ( From Anarchist Theory FAQ Version 5.2 ) : "Now the anarcho-capitalist essentially turns the minarchist's own logic against him, and asks why the remaining functions of the state could not be turned over to the free market. And so, the anarcho-capitalist imagines that police services could be sold by freely competitive firms; that a court system would emerge to peacefully arbitrate disputes between firms; and that a sensible legal code could be developed through custom, precedent, and contract."

Indeed, the functions in question could certainly be turned over to the "free" market, as was done in certain areas of the US during the 19th century, e.g. the coal towns that were virtually owned by private coal companies.  Our objection is not that such privatisation cannot be done, but that it is an error to call it a form of anarchism. In reality it is an extreme form of laissez-faire capitalism, which is the exact opposite of anarchism. The defence of private power by private police is hardly a move towards the end of authority, nor are collections of private states an example of anarchism.

Indeed, that "anarcho"-capitalism does not desire the end of the state, just a change in its form, can be seen from Caplan's arguments. He states that "the remaining functions of the state" should be "turned over to the free market." Thus the state (and its functions, primarily the defence of capitalist property rights) is privatised and not, in fact, abolished. In effect, the "anarcho"-capitalist seeks to abolish the state by calling it something else.

Caplan:

"The anarcho-capitalist typically hails modern society's increasing reliance on private security guards, gated communities, arbitration and mediation, and other demonstrations of the free market's ability to supply the defensive and legal services normally assumed to be of necessity a government monopoly."

It is questionable that "modern society" as such has increased its reliance on "private security guards, gated communities" and so on. Rather, it is the wealthy who have increased their reliance on these forms of private defence. Indeed it is strange to hear a right-libertarian even use the term "society" as, according to that ideology, society does not exist! Perhaps the term "society" is used to hide the class nature of these developments? As for "gated communities" it is clear that their inhabitants would object if the rest of society gated themselves from them! But such is the logic of such developments -- but the gated communities want it both ways. They seek to exclude the rest of society from their communities while expected to be given access to that society. Needless to say, Caplan fails to see that liberty for the rich can mean oppression for the working class -- "we who belong to the proletaire class, property excommunicates us!" [Proudhon, What is Property? , p. 105]

That the law code of the state is being defended by private companies is hardly a step towards anarchy. This indicates exactly why an "anarcho"- capitalist system will be a collection of private states united around a common, capitalistic, and hierarchical law code. In addition, this system does not abolish the monopoly of government over society represented by the "general libertarian law code," nor the monopoly of power that owners have over their property and those who use it. The difference between public and private statism is that the boss can select which law enforcement agents will enforce his or her power.

The threat to freedom and justice for the working class is clear. The thug-like nature of many private security guards enforcing private power is well documented. For example, the beating of protesters by "private cops" is a common sight in anti-motorway campaigns or when animal right activists attempt to disrupt fox hunts. The shooting of strikers during strikes occurred during the peak period of American laissez-faire capitalism. However, as most forms of protest involve the violation of "absolute" property rights, the "justice" system under "anarcho"-capitalism would undoubtedly fine the victims of such attacks by private cops.

It is also interesting that the "anarcho"-capitalist "hails" what are actually symptoms of social breakdown under capitalism. With increasing wealth disparity, poverty, and chronic high unemployment, society is becoming polarised into those who can afford to live in secure, gated communities and those who cannot. The latter are increasingly marginalised in ghettos and poor neighbourhoods where drug-dealing, prostitution, and theft become main forms of livelihood, with gangs offering a feudalistic type of "protection" to those who join or pay tribute to them. Under "anarcho"-capitalism, the only change would be that drug-dealing and prostitution would be legalised and gangs could start calling themselves "defence companies."

Caplan:

"In his ideal society, these market alternatives to government services would take over all legitimate security services. One plausible market structure would involve individuals subscribing to one of a large number of competing police services; these police services would then set up contracts or networks for peacefully handling disputes between members of each others' agencies. Alternately, police services might be 'bundled' with housing services, just as landlords often bundle water and power with rental housing, and gardening and security are today provided to residents in gated communities and apartment complexes."

This is a scenario designed with the upper classes in mind and a few working class people, i.e. those with some property (for example, a house) -- sometimes labelled the "middle class". But under capitalism, the tendency toward capital concentration leads to increasing wealth polarisation, which means a shrinking "middle class" (i.e. working class with decent jobs and their own homes) and a growing "underclass" (i.e. working class people without a decent job). Ironically enough, America (with one of the most laissez-faire capitalist systems) is also the Western nation with the smallest "middle class" and wealth concentration has steadily increased since the 1970s. Thus the number of people who could afford to buy protection and "justice" from the best companies would continually decrease. For this reason there would be a growing number of people at the mercy of the rich and powerful, particularly when it comes to matters concerning employment, which is the main way in which the poor would be victimised by the rich and powerful (as is indeed the case now).

Of course, if landlords do "bundle" police services in their contracts this means that they are determining the monopoly of force over the property in question. Tenants would "consent" to the police force and the laws of the landlord in exactly the same way emigrants "consent" to the laws and government of, say, the USA when they move there. Rather than show the difference between statism and capitalism, Caplan has indicated their essential commonality. For the proletarian, property is but another form of state. For this reason anarchists would agree with Rousseau when he wrote that:

"That a rich and powerful man, having acquired immense possessions in lands, should impose laws on those who want to establish themselves there, and that he should only allow them to do so on condition that they accept his supreme authority and obey all his wishes; that, I can still conceive. But how can I conceive such a treaty, which presupposes anterior rights, could be the first foundation of law? Would not this tyrannical act contain a double usurpation: that on the ownership of the land and that on the liberty of the inhabitants?" [ The Social Contract and Discourses , p. 316]

Caplan:

"The underlying idea is that contrary to popular belief, private police would have strong incentives to be peaceful and respect individual rights. For first of all, failure to peacefully arbitrate will yield to jointly destructive warfare, which will be bad for profits. Second, firms will want to develop long-term business relationships, and hence be willing to negotiate in good faith to insure their long-term profitability. And third, aggressive firms would be likely to attract only high-risk clients and thus suffer from extraordinarily high costs (a problem parallel to the well-known 'adverse selection problem' in e.g. medical insurance -- the problem being that high-risk people are especially likely to seek insurance, which drives up the price when riskiness is hard for the insurer to discern or if regulation requires a uniform price regardless of risk)."

The theory that "failure to peacefully arbitrate will yield to jointly destructive warfare, which will be bad for profits" can be faulted in two ways. Firstly, if warfare would be bad for profits, what is to stop a large "defence association" from ignoring a smaller one's claim? If warfare were "bad for business," it would be even worse for a small company without the capital to survive a conflict, which could give big "defence associations" the leverage to force compliance with their business interests. Price wars are often bad for business, but companies sometimes start them if they think they can win. Needless to say, demand would exist for such a service (unless you assume a transformation in the "human nature" generated by capitalism -- an unlikely situation and one "anarcho"-capitalists usually deny is required for their system to work). Secondly -- and this is equally, if not more, likely -- a "balance of power" method to stop warfare has little to recommend it from history. This can be seen from the First World War and feudal society.

What the "anarcho"-capitalist is describing is essentially a system of "industrial feudalism" wherein people contract for "protection" with armed gangs of their choice. Feudal societies have never been known to be peaceful, even though war is always "unprofitable" for one side or the other or both. The argument fails to consider that "defence companies," whether they be called police forces, paramilitaries or full-blown armies, tend to attract the "martial" type of authoritarian personality, and that this type of "macho" personality thrives on and finds its reason for existence in armed conflict and other forms of interpersonal violence and intimidation. Hence feudal society is continually wracked by battles between the forces of opposing warlords, because such conflicts allow the combatants a chance to "prove their manhood," vent their aggression, obtain honours and titles, advance in the ranks, obtain spoils, etc. The "anarcho" capitalist has given no reason why warfare among legalised gangs would not continue under industrial feudalism, except the extremely lame reason that it would not be profitable -- a reason that has never prevented war in any known feudal society.

However, let us assume that such a competitive system does actually work as described. Caplan, in effect, argues that competition will generate co-operation. This is due to the nature of the market in question -- defence (and so peace) is dependent on firms working together as the commodity "peace" cannot be supplied by one firm. However, this co-operation does not, for some reason, become collusion between the firms in question. According to "anarcho"-capitalists this competitive system not only produces co-operation, it excludes "defence" firms making agreements to fix monopoly profits (i.e. co-operation that benefits the firms in question). Why does the market produce beneficial co-operation to everyone but not collusion for the firms in question? Collusion is when firms have "business relationships" and "negotiate in good faith" to insure their profitability by agreeing not to compete aggressively against each other in order to exploit the market. Obviously in "anarcho"-capitalism the firms in question only use their powers for good!

Needless to say, the "anarcho"-capitalist will object and argue that competition will ensure that collusion will not occur. However, given that co-operation is required between all firms in order to provide the commodity "peace" this places the "anarcho"-capitalist in a bind. As Caplan notes, "aggressive" firms are "likely to attract only high-risk clients and thus suffer from extraordinarily high costs." From the perspective of the colluding firms, a new entry into their market is, by definition, aggressive. If the colluding firms do not co-operate with the new competitor, then it will suffer from "extraordinarily high costs" and either go out of business or join the co-operators. If the new entry could survive in the face of the colluding firms hostility then so could "bad" defence firms, ones that ignored the market standards.

So the "anarcho"-capitalist faces two options. Either an "aggressive" firm cannot survive or it can. If it cannot then the very reason why it cannot ensures that collusion is built into the market and while the system is peaceful it is based on an effective monopoly of colluding firms who charge monopoly profits. This, in effect, is a state under the "anarcho"-capitalist's definition as a property owner cannot freely select their own "protection" -- they are limited to the firms (and laws) provided by the co-operating firms. Or an "aggressive" firm can survive, violence is commonplace and chaos ensures.

Caplan's passing reference to the "adverse selection problem" in medical insurance suggests another problem with "anarcho"-capitalism. The problem is that high-risk people are especially likely to seek protection, which drives up the price for, as "anarcho"-capitalists themselves note, areas with high crime levels "will be bad for profits," as hardware and personnel costs will be correspondingly higher. This means that the price for "protection" in areas which need it most will be far higher than for areas which do not need it. As poor areas are generally more crime afflicted than rich areas, "anarcho"-capitalism may see vast sections of the population not able to afford "protection" (just as they may not be about to afford health care and other essential services). Indeed, "protection services" which try to provide cheap services to "high-risk" areas will be at an competitive disadvantage in relation to those who do not, as the "high-risk" areas will hurt profits and companies without "high-risk" "customers" could undercut those that have.

Competition among protection agensies will not work. The larger "eats" the small. It is in a protection agencies best interest to eliminate the competition.  Once the competition is eliminated the protection agency can not only corner the market, but then force everyone into the market for their services whether they want them or not (i.e. effectively become a state). While its true that violence destroys wealth in general, it can enhance the wealth of an aggressor, so while humanities overall wealth may go down, the aggressor's wealth goes up. I also don't see how it necessarily follows that any aggravated assault on the competition is going to destroy the business of the larger agency. Since these agencies are for profit, I'd think their primary interest would be to maximize profit. There is a negative feedback loop with protection services. The better job you do, the less people feel they need your services. What forces protection agencies to compete in the market rather then use force to corner the market? Not anything significant.

Conclusion: Competing court services sold for means of payment will be significantly corrupt and not making equality before the law. It will be "law and order" for the relatively rich, they will have it their way, and no real law and order for the relatively poor. "Anarcho"-capitalist law and order means in reality state, not anarchy. For real anarchist solutions to the law and order problem, see "Antimilitarism - an anarchist approach" IJA 2 (38) .

See also: Anarchy vs narcotic-liberalism, "Free" marketers and slave contracts, The logic of collective action and anarchism, Anarchism vs "free" markets/"anarcho"-capitalism and "Free" marketers/"anarcho"-capitalists are statists; i.e. other relevant articles on the Anarchy Debate.

Source: An Anarchist FAQ Webpage, http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/1931/ and Anarchist Theory FAQ or Instead of a FAQ, by a Man Too Busy to Write One by Bryan Caplan , http://www.gmu.edu/departments/economics/bcaplan/anarfaq.htm .

---

Anarchy vs narcotic-liberalism

by A. Quist 27.06.2008

With narcotic-liberalism I mean a system with no restrictions, selferegulation or other regulations, on narcotic/drugs trade.

It is true that AI bans narcotics, but AI does not ban alcohol. But the AI advocates moderate use of alcohol. Also it is true that the people really concerned, mostly anarchists in an anarchy of high degree, can decide regulations on the market, to avoid slave contracts and promote free contracts, promote possession and avoid property, i.e. theft, etc. Anarchism is about free people, as opposed to "free" markets. When the markets are 100% "free", the people are unfree. That is why "free" marketers are not anarchists.

In an anarchy of high degree, close to the anarchist ideal with 90%-100% degree of anarchy, and AI anarchists that ban narcotics form a commune or several, (say, buying out narcotic-slaves and dealers and other authoritarians), this will be no problem. The members of the AI communes have voluntarely accepted regulations on narcotic trade with general consent, and they of course have full right to do this on their area. The AI-members will not accept narcotic trade on their area. What you and your friends do outside the AI-communes is your own business. The AI-members will however not associate with narcotic-trade "anarchists".

The same goes for other market regulations, in general the AI-anarchist communes will not accept authoritarian, coercive market failures, but use selfregulation of the market to do away with such failures. It is the hope that many communes will be establish in this way, with AI-anarchists and associates, and perhaps they will spread across the whole country. I cannot understand why you defend authoritarian, coercive market failures. I guess even you will prefer to live in an AI-commune with significantly no narcotic slaves/trade, no slave contracts, but free contracts, possesion not property i.e. theft etc.

Thus there is no majority rule over minority in an anarchy of high degree as suggested by AI. It is a consensus based participatory, real democracy, plus a private sector based on markets, regulated i a bit, i.e. selfregulation, to avoid slave contracts and promote free contracts, avoid property (i.e. theft) and promote possession, etc, in general laws against authoritarian, coercive market failures. Say, if you think you are exposed to a slave contract you may sue via the anarchist arbitration courts. This is of course anarchism, not ochlarchy (mob rule broadly defined).

Use of drugs has both individual and collective aspects. "Freedom, i.e. free people, freedom without damaging the freedom of other people; not "free markets", say, drug liberalism and more drug slaves broadly defined. Solidarity is important in this context..." From IJA 1994-95. Drug slaves are not free people. Drug/narcotic slavery is no better than other slavery. A society with a lot of drug slaves is thus not anarchist. With a lot of drug slaves the society will not function in an anarchist way. Drug slaves cannot work properly, cannot take care of their children properly etc, and thus are a burden to other people. In short this is why AI is for laws against use of drugs/narcotics. This will at least make a lot fewer drug slaves than without such laws.

Authoritarians notoriously mix up anarchy, anarchist and anarchism with authoritarian tendencies: Chaos, disorder, mob rule, lawlessness, the law of the jungle, criminality, riots, theft, corruption, drugs, mafia, terrorism, autocratic rule, the right to the strongest, antisocial tyrannic behavior, etc., i.e. different types of superiors and subordinates. This is not anarchy.

The Anarchist International does not follow the statist "logic" for solving the narcotic problem, mostly only using the law against narcotics. This does not work well. Resolving the problem would take anti-drug campaigns, informing the people of what are drugs, how do they work, what does each cause, setting up rehabilitation programs, eliminating the reasons people turn to drugs, etc. It would take actions that require planning, effort and resources. A combination of these measures and a ban on narcotics, will work towards solving the authoritarian narcotic problem.

There are two articles, one from the WHO Project on Health Implications of Cannabis Use: A Comparative Appraisal of the Health and Psychological Consequences of Alcohol, Cannabis, Nicotine and Opiate Use, August 28, 1995, (later withdrawn), and one published in Lancet presenting a "chart", suggesting that Cannabis, GHB, LSD and other "soft" narcotics are less addictive and damaging for the physical and mental health than alcohol and nicotine. These articles are used by defenders of a "free" narcotic market, as an "argument" for not banning narcotics. But these two articles are not representative for the research front on the matter, counting thousands of articles, that reject this hypothesis. This "chart" is totally wrong. A moderate, low, use of wine to dinner, is by no means addictive or make any damage to you physical or mental health. In fact it is healthy. This as opposed to the "soft" narcotics on the "chart". All the "soft" narcotics on the chart are addictive and damaging for the physical and/or mental health. A lot of people using these "soft" narcotics are in mental hospitals, due to the use of these drugs. They do not function well. The concept of "narcotic slave" must be seen in a wider context, not only addiction. There is no significant scientifical background for this "chart".

Also alcoholics are a big problem, and they often also use narcotics. "Pure" alcoholics are however to a less degree slaves than narcotic slaves. Thus, as mentioned, the Anarchist International does not suggest laws against alcohol. We suggest moderate, low, use of alchohol or no use at all, see http://www.anarchy.no/frf.html . We also suggest moderate to no use of tobacco. However alcohol and tobacco are so integrated in the western culture that we are not for a total ban of these. It would not work. However narcotics/drugs are not a part of the western culture, so a ban has significant effect. Thus it is not counter-logical to argue for the ban of, for example, marijuana, but not the ban of alcohol and cigarettes.

LSD Addiction And Dependency

I don't think use of LSD will make people more libertarian. I was a hippie, with an anarchist tendency, a short periode in my early life, but I never used narcotics/drugs. I know some that used LSD in these days, but they are not anarchists or libertarian. Some that used LSD have severe mental problems.

As for the effects of LSD abuse and addiction, they are not as easily rendered as drugs such as amphetamines and cocaine. LSD essentially removes the boundaries of sensible judgment and perception, creating a situation in which the individual taking it does not know or understand what they are doing. If any other chemicals are present in the system, including simple over the counter drugs, the ability to understand one's actions may be entirely impaired.

Some LSD users experience severe, terrifying thoughts and feelings, fear of losing control, fear of insanity and death, and despair while using LSD. Some fatal accidents have occurred during states of LSD intoxication.

The actual damage LSD might cause to the brain and body is not completely agreed upon, but the temporary effects in the hallucinating state are entirely possible of causing physical injury. Furthermore, there is a disorder recognized by Psychologists as a possible result of LSD abuse, which causes the brain to flashback to previous LSD sessions and the effects of the hallucination. Chronically, the flashbacks can occur anytime from one week to two or three years after using the drug.

LSD Addiction And Dependency Recovery

For those that are under LSD addiction / dependency or are experiencing the debilitating effects of LSD, abuse recovery is much simpler than with some other drugs. Because it's mostly a psychological drug, there are no direct correlations between LSD and physical dependence. The body will actually become attuned to it with heavy use and the effects will stop.

However, as with anything in excess, the mind can become psychologically dependent on the drug, and overcoming such dependency can be very hard. Because it is not a physical dependence though, overcoming LSD abuse can be accomplished much easier than some other drugs. A loving family and friends to support you will go a long way to overcoming what you think you need on a daily basis.

Like any illegal drug, LSD is not meant to be taken and abused by anyone. There are no benefits of taking the drug, and the dangers are ample. Forcing your body into such a state with a chemically concocted substance is a poor way to find fun in anything. If you or a loved one suffers from LSD addiction, seek expert help right away. (Source: http://www.markhoustonrecovery.com/lsd_addiction_and_dependency.php .)

I use the words addiction and dependency quite synonymously. You are a drugslave of LSD if you are psychologically dependent/addicted to the drug. What the government means about this is not important. The Oslo Convention defines drugs/narcotics, i.e. including LSD, as an authoritarian tendency, that may lead to drugslavery, no better than other slavery. Anarchy and anarchism mean "system and management without ruler(s), i.e. co-operation without repression, tyranny and slavery". This has also something to do with the freedom concept related to anarchism, see "The freedom concept defined and related to anarchism etc." at http://www.anarchy.no/andebate.html . If LSD was as commonly used as alchohol and tobacco, it would have severe consequences. A society on LSD will not work anarchist.

To have an open mind is not the same as blowin' your brains out. That is mainly what LSD do. I have seen it at some persons during the hippie-time. They got "soft on the brain", and stopped thinking critical, scientific, and matter of fact. LSD is not a way to revolutionary thinking, this is a myth. The same as I here have mentioned for LSD, is also valid for "magic mushrooms" and marijuana.

The Anarchist Federation in/of Norway (AFIN) supports laws against use of LSD.

If LSD was legal, probably most young people that try "to bend limits" would us it regularly. Obviously, if LSD were as commonly used as coffee and cigarettes, we'd all be in really big trouble.

95% of narcotic/drug users captured by the police in Norway get ticket fines or other small fines, they don't go to jail. Persons that get prison have usually done other offences such as theft, robbery, etc. to finance the narcotic/drug use, see http://fmr.no/index.php?id=72707 . Furthermore there is a broad based unity among youths in Norway for laws against narcotics/drugs, so it is not something imposed from above, from authority, see http://www.idunn.no/?marketplaceId=2000&languageId=1&siteNodeId=2873422. Thus the ban of narcotics/drugs is significantly a form of selfregulation, and not freedom forced upon people by outside authorities.

Narcotic-liberalism is statism

Narcotic-liberalism is not anarchism/anarchy, liberalism is a form of statism, see http://www.anarchy.no/a_e_p_m.html . Marxism, fascism and liberalism are different forms of state/government/authority/archy. People that are drug-slaves, flat on their face because of use of drugs, mean a subordinate position vs people that are not drug-slaves and standing. We can see people flat on their face because of drug use, lying on the streets, in some parts of Oslo. Thus heavy drug users, narcotic slaves, are in this way subordinate to non-users. However they of course have the same human rights as anyone else, and should be treated with dignity.

Real personal freedom is also freedom from drug-slavery. Drug/narcotic slaves are not free, and thus there is less freedom the more drug-slaves. The more drug use, the more drug-slaves. Thus laws against drug/narcotic use are necessary. Drug-slaves lying flat on their face because of drug use, in general want a drug free life, to get out of the slavery. Thus they don't want it, but want to get out of it, but cannot without help, because of the dependence/addiction. "Repression of drug users"? It is in reality about freedom from drug-slavery. That drug-slaves are less free than non-narcotic users, being subordinate, etc., are a reality, not a conventional, subjective, question of who decide what makes someone free. An environment without narcotics/drug use is an environment that makes it more easy to stop being narcotic/drug slaves. Narcotics/drugs in the environment make an unnecessary temptation. Thus in solidarity, an important anarchist principle, we should all do our best to create a drug/narcotic free environment, and stop using even small amounts of drugs/narcotics.

The Anarchist International has introduced a solidaric libertarian rebellion against the whole authoritarian narcotic culture. We will do away with it - significantly, preferably all of it. You should join in this fight, not be a part of the problem, defending false "charts" and other expressions of the authoritarian narcotic culture. Drugs/narcotics are freedom-robbers, the more use, the more addicts/narcotic slaves. Legalizing, also with state-regulations, thus means more drug slaves. The AI is against slavery and thus against all forms of legalization of drugs/narcotics.

---

The Anarchist International condemns brutal stabbing of a workers' activist in South China

by AI 28.11.2007

The Anarchist International has today written to the Shenzhen authorities,   xuzh@sz.gov.cn , to protest at the brutal stabbing of Huang Qingnan, a worker from a local Shenzhen-based labor advice and support centre. He remains in a serious condition  and may lose one of his limbs. Two previous attacks in recent weeks have targeted the centre itself. In  this email sent to Xu Zhongheng, Mayor of Shenzhen, the AI charges that Huang, a legal delegate of Shenzhen's "Dagongzhe" Centre, was attacked near the centre's' offices and severely wounded on 20 November by two men armed with knives. He was reportedly stabbed repeatedly and left with knife wounds over 10 cm. long. The centre itself had been ransacked in two previous attacks, on 11 October and 12 November 2007. 

These attacks appear to be connected to a larger campaign directed towards the centre and in particular its work with migrants, in the run-up to the implementation of the new Labour Contract Law, which will come into force on 1 January 2008. Reports from the Shenzhen area indicate many workers are being beaten or verbally threatened when they try to claim unpaid or missing wages in connection with layoffs taking place prior to the implementation of the new law, which provides safeguards for longstanding workers. Reports of employers dismissing longstanding workers include major Chinese companies such as Huawei, China's Central TV broadcasting company (CCTV), various teaching organizations and Wal-Mart. It now appears that this practice is being mirrored by more violent means to intimidate and threaten workers who try to resist these moves.

The recent attacks against the Dagongzhe Centre in Shenzhen were consistent with reports of increasing harassment, monitoring and surveillance of workers' rights groups throughout China, but predominantly in the Pearl River Delta.  Many such groups were facing quiet but continued harassment from local officials as well as from various sources who had been pressurized into withdrawing support previously extended to them, for example in the form of official registration, tax matters and rental issues. The AI also expresses disquiet over a corresponding increase in the number of journalists and lawyers being detained and harassed about their work regarding labor rights issues and related civil society defense work.

These organizations play a vital role in the well being of local society and the welfare of the workers and the safety of their staff must be guaranteed. Unless the perpetrators of such vile attacks are brought to justice and punished in accordance with the law, the harassment of workers' rights activists – both by officials and by companies – will continue and will only serve to hinder the development of the much talked about "harmonious society".

In practice, as now in China, the maoists are left fascists: As a rule of the thumb a gini-index above 35 indicates economical plutarchy/capitalism, while a gini-index below 35 indicates socialism. Thus China, with a gini-index at 44, 7 is clearly capitalist, and it is not very efficient, with GDP per capita at only 1,100 US $ per year (2003). Thus it has very significant economical plutarchy. Furthermore it is a dictatorship, with a very high degree of statism, i.e. all in all totalitarian, with more than 67% authoritarian degree. Thus it has both significant amount of capitalism as well as statism, and thus it is a fascist country, see http://www.anarchy.no/a_e_p_m.html  and http://www.anarchy.no/ranking.html . It is no 88 on the ranking of countries according to libertarian degree, i.e. it is clearly very authoritarian.

 El Anarquista Internacional condena el brutal apuñalamiento de un activista de los trabajadores en el sur de China

El Anarquista Internacional ha escrito hoy a las autoridades de Shenzhen, xuzh@sz.gov.cn , para protestar por el brutal apuñalamiento de Huang Qingnan, un trabajador de un local de Shenzhen basado en el trabajo de asesoramiento y centro de apoyo. Él permanece en estado grave y puede perder una de sus extremidades. Dos anteriores ataques en las últimas semanas han tenido como objetivo el propio centro. En este mensaje de correo electrónico enviado a Xu Zhongheng, alcalde de Shenzhen, la AI cargos que Huang, un delegado jurídico de Shenzhen's "Dagongzhe" Centro, fue atacado cerca del centro de oficinas y gravemente herido, el 20 de noviembre por dos hombres armados con Cuchillos. Según se informa, fue repetidamente apuñalado con un cuchillo y dejó heridas más de 10 cm de. De largo. El propio centro ha sido saqueado en dos ataques anteriores, el 11 de octubre y 12 de noviembre de 2007.

Estos ataques parecen estar conectado a una campaña más amplia dirigida hacia el centro y, en particular, su trabajo con los migrantes, en el periodo previo a la aplicación de la nueva Ley de Contrato de Trabajo, que entrará en vigor el 1 de enero de 2008. Shenzhen informes de la zona indican que muchos trabajadores están siendo golpeados o amenazados verbalmente cuando intentan reclamar los salarios pendientes de pago o de los desaparecidos en relación con los despidos tienen lugar antes de la aplicación de la nueva ley, que establece garantías para los trabajadores de larga data. Informes de los empleadores despedir a los trabajadores de larga duración incluyen las principales empresas chinas, como Huawei, China Central TV compañía de radiodifusión (CCTV), diversas organizaciones de enseñanza y Wal-Mart. Ahora parece ser que esta práctica está siendo reflejado por los medios más violentos para intimidar y amenazar a los trabajadores que tratan de resistirse a estos cambios.

Los recientes ataques contra el Dagongzhe Centro en Shenzhen estaban en consonancia con el aumento de los informes de acoso, seguimiento y vigilancia de los derechos de los trabajadores grupos en toda China, pero sobre todo en la zona del delta del río Pearl. Muchos de estos grupos se enfrentan tranquila pero constante hostigamiento de los funcionarios locales, así como de las diversas fuentes que se han presurizado en la retirada de apoyo previamente a los mismos, por ejemplo en la forma de inscripción en el registro oficial, cuestiones fiscales y cuestiones de alquiler. La AI también expresa su inquietud sobre un aumento correspondiente en el número de periodistas y abogados detenidos y acosados sobre su labor en materia de derechos laborales y cuestiones relacionadas con el trabajo de defensa de la sociedad civil.

Estas organizaciones desempeñan un papel vital en el bienestar de la sociedad local y el bienestar de los trabajadores y la seguridad de su personal debe ser garantizada. A menos que los autores de esos viles ataques sean llevados ante la justicia y castigados de acuerdo con la ley, el acoso de los derechos de los trabajadores activistas, tanto por los funcionarios y por las empresas - continuará y sólo sirven para obstaculizar el desarrollo del habla mucho de "Sociedad armoniosa".

En la práctica, como ahora en China, la maoists quedan fascistas: Como regla del pulgar - un índice de Gini por encima de 35 indica económico plutarchy / capitalismo, mientras que un índice de Gini por debajo de 35 indica el socialismo. Así, China, con un índice de Gini de 44, 7 es claramente capitalista, y no es muy eficiente, con un PIB per cápita de sólo 1100 dólares EE.UU. por año (2003). Por lo tanto, tiene muy significativo económico plutarchy (la plutocracia). Además, es una dictadura, con un alto grado de estatismo, es decir, todos en todos los totalitarios, con más del 67% autoritario grado. Por lo tanto, tiene a la vez parte importante del capitalismo, así como el estatismo, y por lo tanto se trata de un país fascista, y ver http://www.anarchy.no/a_e_p_m.html , http://www.anarchy.no/ranking.html .  No es de 88 en la clasificación de los países según el grado libertaria, es decir, que es claramente muy autoritario.

La resolución se publica en http://www.anarchy.no/andebate.html

(Translation to Spanish by CNT Sagunto (España))

---

En la Brecha (In the Gap) - CNT-AIT 03.12.2007

News from Spanish anarchosyndicalists 3/ 12 / 2007

CNT Sagunto (España) Nº 23
http://www.cnt.es/sagunto/index_archivos/En_la_brecha_CNT.htm

La Sanidad pública de Madrid en peligro de extinción
http://www.attacmadrid.org/d/9/071201113523_php/071201113523.php 3/12/07

"Colom bia quiere una paz con justicia social"
http://www.diagonalperiodico.net/article4924.html Número 66. 29 Nov - 12 Dic 2007

Sobre la Reforma Constitucional en Venezuela
http://www.nodo50.org/ellibertario/reforma.html 3/12/07

Proyecto "De Tierras y de Utopías" los invita a la presentación del documental  "Jachal, cuando ya nadie te nombre" http://www.detierrasydeutopias.com.ar/actividades.html

Proudhon and Tucker's basic ideas - new links at www.anarchy.no INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR ORGANIZATION RESEARCHhttp://www.cnt.es/sagunto/index_archivos/correos_recibidos.htm 3/12/07

F L I A (Feria del Libro Independiente y Alternativa) Federación Libertaria Argentina http://www.diegoarbit.com.ar/ 3/12/07

Levante Artículo de un afiliado de CNT- AIT de Sagunto - ¿Qué memoria, que perdón?
http://www.cnt.es/sagunto/index_archivos/Page601.htm 2/12/07

Información de movimientos sociales http://movimientos.org/ 2/12/07

Antifascismo e inteligencia colectiva http://www.diagonalperiodico.net/article4931.html 2/11/07

Levante - Multitudinario entierro del joven anarquista Militante de CNT muerto en Valencia http://www.elpais.com/articulo/espana/ESPANA/PARTIDO_SOCIALISTA_OBRERO_ESPANOL_/PSOE/ANARQUISMO/Multitudinario/entierro/joven/anarquista/muerto/Valencia/elpepiesp/19790628elpepinac_4/Tes 2/12/07

Barrios por memoria y justicia Almagro - Balvanera; Los esperamos el sábado 8 diciembre – 18h Viamonte 2565 – Ciudad de BS. AS. http://www.memorialmagro.blogspot.com/ 2/12/07

Cuando los jornaleros mandan - Inmigrantes trabajadores del campo en EEUU derrotan a varias multinacionales de comida rápida Sábado,1ro de diciembre de 2007 http://www.nodo50.org/tortuga/article.php3?id_article=7004 1/12/07

Guerrero, Ayotzinapa: Policía Estatal y Federal reprime a profesores, 56 detenidos, gobernador insiste en represión
http://cml.vientos.info/node/12031 1/12/07

CNT Boicot a la marca Caprabo deurante la primera quincena de Diciembre
http://cnt-caprabociencias.blogspot.com/ 1/12/07

Recordando a Juan Gómez Casas
http://ultimabarricada.blogspot.com/2007/11/juan-gmez-casas-un-autentico.html 1/12/07

( La Malatesta ) Hemos vuelto y esta vez es para quedarnos! www.lamalatesta.net . 30/11/07

Entrevista con Amparo Salvador, presidenta del Fòrum per la Memòria del País Valencià http://www.barriodelcarmen.net/evolucion/content/view/466/136/ 30/11/07

Debate com ativista do F.A.O. e da COB/ACAT/IWA-AIT em Prol de Uniao pela base dos hermanos proletarios Orkut Foros 28-29-30/11/07 http://www.cnt.es/sagunto/index_archivos/correos_recibidos.htm 30/11/07

Más de cien actos en recuerdo de Carlos http://www.diagonalperiodico.net/article4925.html 29/1107

Sevilla: Están desalojando el CSOA Casas Viejas //información permanente//Fotos
http://www.klinamen.org/article3484.html 29/11/07

Novedades en la web de CNT de Cantabria: http://www.cnt.es/cantabria/ 29/11/07

Muere Fernando Fernán Gómez a los 86 años. 21/11/07
http://ultimabarricada.blogspot.com/2007/11/juan-gmez-casas-un-autentico.html

CNT Cartagena Articulo de Fernando Fernán Gómez publicado por el diario ABC el sábado 7 de septiembre de 1991. http://www.cnt.es/cartagena/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=26&Itemid=1 28/11/07

V Encuentro del libro Anarquista de Madrid del 30 de Nov. al 2 de Dic. en la Prospe http://www.klinamen.org/article3277.html 24/10/07

En la brecha

1º http://www.cnt.es/sagunto/index_archivos/En_la_brecha_CNT.htm
2º http://www.cnt.es/sagunto/index_archivos/Europa.htm
3º http://www.cnt.es/sagunto/index_archivos/America.htm
Que salga publicado no significa que estemos de acuerdo
CNT Sagunto (españa)
www.cnt.es/sagunto
camp_de_morvedre@cnt.es

---

INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR ORGANIZATION RESEARCH
http://www.anarchy.no/iifor.html  
IIFOR P.B. 4777 Sofienberg N- 0506 Oslo - Norway (03.12.2007)

Benjamin R. Tucker's basic ideas

Here we present the basic ideas of Benjamin Ricketson Tucker, excerpted from the book; Individual Liberty, Selections, From the Writings of Benjamin R. Tucker, Vanguard Press, New York, 1926, Kraus Reprint Co., Millwood, NY, 1973, i.e. mainly a) State Socialism and Anarchism: How far they agree, and wherein they differ, and b) Property Under Anarchism. Regarding a) it must be mentioned that Tucker mostly supports the "modified" labor theory of value of Josiah Warren, i.e. the "cost principle", that really is not LTOV at all as defined in Marxism, but is more according with Kropotkin, that rejected the LTOV, see Modern Science and Anarchism http://www.anarchy.no/kropot1.html . Regarding b) it must be mentioned that it is clear from the text and other writings from Tucker, that when he writes about "property", he means "possession", not private capitalistic property, following Proudhon's hypothesis that "property is theft", see http://www.anarchy.no/proudhon.html . It is also interesting that when he writes about law and order in an anarchist society, based on juries, he indicates only one set of laws, not several. We have also quoted statements from Liberty and Property and Anarchism and Crime, from the same book.

It must also be mentioned that the economic theories of Tucker are a bit outdated, a.o.t. neglecting authoritarian coercive market failures and how to deal with it. Furthermore the attack on Kropotkin's theories for not being anarchist, is not accepted by the Anarchist International. Tucker was an individualist anarchist, placed to the right of Proudhon on the economic-political map, see  http://www.anarchy.no/a_e_p_m.html  , but still a significant socialist. (IIFOR)

See link: http://www.anarchy.no/tucker.html

Pierre Joseph Proudhon's basic ideas

Proudhon is most famous for his hypothesis that Property is theft. He was a social individualist anarchist, see the economic-political map at http://www.anarchy.no/a_e_p_m.html . IIFOR's precisation of Proudhon's property vs possession concept is: "Anarchies very briefly defined are systems with small rank and income differences, plus efficiency. Any ownership that is compatible with systems with small rank and income differences, plus efficiency, is possession. Possession may be individual or collective, private or public. Any ownership that results in large income differences is capitalist, economical plutarchy. Any ownership that results in large rank differences is statist." This is property, i.e. not possession. The basic ideas of Proudhon are elaborated in the following quotes.

See link: http://www.anarchy.no/proudhon.html

INSTITUTO INTERNACIONAL DE INVESTIGACIÓN ORGANIZACIÓN
http://www.anarchy.no/iifor.html - IIFOR PB 4777 Sofienberg N - 0506 Oslo - Noruega

 Benjamin R. Tucker's ideas básicas

 Aquí presentamos las ideas básicas de Benjamin Ricketson Tucker, extraídos de los libros; Individual Liberty, Selecciones, A partir de los escritos de Benjamin R. Tucker, Vanguard Press, New York, 1926, Kraus Reprint Co, Millwood, NY, 1973, es decir, Principalmente a) del Socialismo de Estado y Anarquismo: ¿En qué medida están de acuerdo, y en el que se diferencian, y b) De los bienes en virtud del Anarquismo. En cuanto a la) cabe mencionar que la mayoría apoya la Tucker "modificado" teoría laboral del valor de Josiah Warren, es decir, el "principio de los costos", que realmente no es LTOV a todos, tal como se definen en el marxismo, pero está más de acuerdo con Kropotkin, que Rechazó la LTOV, véase Modern Ciencia y Anarquismo http://www.anarchy.no/kropot1.html . En relación con b), cabe mencionar que se desprende del texto y otros escritos de Tucker, que cuando escribe acerca de "la propiedad", que quiere decir "posesión", y no la propiedad privada capitalista, después de Proudhon de la hipótesis de que "la propiedad es un robo", Ver http://www.anarchy.no/proudhon.html . También es interesante que cuando escribe acerca de la ley y el orden en una sociedad anarquista, sobre la base de los jurados, que indica sólo un conjunto de leyes, y no varios. También hemos citado las declaraciones de la Libertad y la Propiedad y del Anarquismo y el Delito, del mismo libro.

 También debe mencionarse que las teorías económicas de Tucker son un poco obsoletas, aot Descuidar autoritario coercitivas a los fallos del mercado y la forma de abordarlo. Además el ataque a las teorías de Kropotkin por no ser anarquista, no es aceptado por la Internacional Anarquista. Tucker fue un anarquista individualista, situado a la derecha de Proudhon en el mapa político, económico, véase http://www.anarchy.no/a_e_p_m.html , pero sigue existiendo una gran socialista. (IIFOR)

 Ver enlace: http://www.anarchy.no/tucker.html

 Pierre Joseph Proudhon's ideas básicas

 Proudhon es más conocido por su hipótesis de que la propiedad es un robo. Era un anarquista individualista sociales, económicos - véase el mapa político en http://www.anarchy.no/a_e_p_m.html . IIFOR del precisation de Proudhon frente a la propiedad de la posesión concepto es: "Anarchies muy brevemente se define con pequeños sistemas de clasificación y las diferencias de ingresos, además de la eficiencia. Cualquier propiedad que sea compatible con los sistemas de clasificación y con pequeñas diferencias de ingresos, además de la eficiencia, es la posesión. La posesión puede ser individual o colectiva, privada o pública. Cualquier propiedad que se traduce en grandes diferencias de ingresos es capitalista, económico plutarchy. Cualquier propiedad que se traduce en grandes diferencias de rango es estatista." Ésta es la propiedad, es decir, no poder. Las ideas básicas de Proudhon se detallan en la siguiente cita.

Ver enlace: http://www.anarchy.no/proudhon.html

---

Ochlarchical tendencies of the anarchists in Spain 1936-39  

by A. Quist 05.12.2007

Background information: [1-6]  Regarding "law and order" in the Spanish revolution Bolloten explains: "The courts of law were supplanted by revolutionary tribunals, which dispensed justice in their own way. 'Everybody created his own justice and administered it himself,' declared Juan Garcia Oliver, a leading Anarchist who became minister of justice in November 1936. 'Some used to call this "taking a person for a ride," [paseo] but I maintain that it was justice administered directly by the people in the complete absence of regular judicial bodies.'"[7] This distinction no doubt escaped the thousands of people who were murdered because they happened to have political or religious beliefs that the Anarchists did not agree with. "'We do not wish to deny,' avowed Diego Abad de Santillan, a prominent Anarchist in the region of Catalonia, 'that the nineteenth of July brought with it an overflowing of passions and abuses, a natural phenomenon of the transfer of power from the hands of privileged to the hands of the people. It is possible that our victory resulted in the death by violence of four or five thousand inhabitants of Catalonia who were listed as rightists and were linked to political or ecclesiastical reaction.'"[8] De Santillan's comment typifies the Spanish Anarchists' attitude toward his movement's act of murder of several thousand people for their political views: it is a mere "natural phenomenon," nothing to feel guilty over. Bolloten's account of the Anarchist militants' wave of murders is well- corroborated by other sources. Thus, Hugh Thomas' The Spanish Civil War (a work which Bolloten takes issue with on a number of points) explains that: "All who could conceivably be suspected of sympathy for the nationalist rising were in danger. As among the nationalists, the irrational circumstances of a civil war made it impossible to lay down what was or was not treason. The worthy died, the unworthy often lived. In East Andalusia, lorries manned by the CNT drove into villages and ordered mayors to hand over their fascists. The mayors had often to say that they had all fled but the terrorists would often hear from informers which of the better off people were still there, arrest them and shoot them in a nearby ravine."[9] Thomas adds that, "In the vast majority of cases, the murders were of the rank and file of the Right. Often members of the working class would be killed by their own acquaintances for hypocrisy, for having kow-towed too often to their social superiors, even simply for untruthfulness. In Altea, near Alicante, for example, a cafe proprietor was killed with a hatchet by an anarchist for having overcharged for stamps and for the glass of wine that buyers of stamps were forced to take while waiting."[10]

Political belief was not the only kind of heterodoxy which the Spanish Anarchists refused to tolerate. Mere acceptance of theism, typically in its catholic variant, provoked many of the Anarchist militants to violence. The burning of religious buildings, from cathedrals and churches to convents and monasteries was widespread, as was the murder of priests and nuns. This might puzzle the naive observer; after all, is not the catholic church a perfect example of a communal, non-profit organization? Is not church property "held in common" by its adherents? At least in theory, the clergy's vow of poverty obliges them to hand over all of their personal property to the church, which then provides for their needs out of the communal stockpile. The catholic church seems to satisfy many of the social postulates that the Spanish Anarchists embraced. This did not save the lives of the unfortunate clergy, since militant atheism had been a feature of European anarchism at least since the time of Bakunin, and because the catholic church had historically allied itself politically with conservative monarchism.

As Bolloten states, "Hundreds of churches and convents were burned or put to secular uses. 'catholic dens no longer exist,' declared the Anarchosyndicalist organ, Solidaridad Obrera . 'The torches of the people have reduced them to ashes.'...'For the Revolution to be a fact,' ran an Anarchist youth manifesto, 'we must demolish the three pillars of reaction: the church, the army, and capitalism. The church has already been brought to account. The temples have been destroyed by fire and the ecclesiastical crows who were unable to escape have been taken care of by the people.'"[11] As Bolloten sums matters up: "Thousands of members of the clergy and religious orders as well as of the propertied classes were killed, but others, fearing arrest or execution, fled abroad, including many prominent liberal or moderate Republicans."

Thomas amply confirms Bolloten's description of the Anarchists' religious persecution and intolerance. "'Do you still believe in this God who never speaks and who does not defend himself even when his images and temples are burned? Admit that God does not exist and that you priests are all so many hypocrites who deceive the people': such questions were put in countless towns and villages of republican Spain. At no time in the history of Europe, or even perhaps of the world, has so passionate a hatred of religion and all its works been shown. Yet one priest who, while 1,215 monks, nuns, and priests died in the province of Barcelona, managed to escape to France through the help of President Companys, was generous enough to admit that 'the reds have destroyed our churches, but we first had destroyed the church.'"[12] , Source [13]

[1] See generally Stanley G. Payne, The Franco Regime: 1946-1975 (Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press, 1987).

[2] Burnett Bolloten, The Spanish Civil War: Revolution and Counterrevolution (Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press, 1991).

[3] Ronald Fraser, Blood of Spain: An Oral History of the Spanish Civil War (NY: Pantheon Books, 1986).

[4] Bolloten, op. cit.

[5] Noam Chomsky, "Objectivity and Liberal Scholarship," in American Power and the New Mandarins (NY: Pantheon Books, 1969), esp. pp.79- 124, p. 140.

[6] Payne, op. cit., pp.34-45, 87-106.

[7] Bolloten, op. cit., p.50.

[8] ibid, p.53.

[9] Hugh Thomas, The Spanish Civil War (London: Hamish Hamilton, 1986), pp.273-274.[10] Thomas, op. cit., pp.275-276.

[11] Bolloten, op. cit., p.51.

[12] Thomas, op. cit., p.273.

[13] Bryan Caplan, The Anarcho-Statists of Spain: An Historical, Economic, and Philosophical Analysis of Spanish Anarchism,   http://www.gmu.edu/departments/economics/bcaplan/spain.htm

---

India on the economic-political map - Indian low castes fight back - India is far from a "functioning anarchy"

by AIIS 14.12.2007 - updated

The newly created Indian relatively autonomous area, so called state, of Chhattisgarh, is one of the hotspots of the social struggle on the subcontinent. Located in the middle of the peninsula it is characterised by a high percentage of tribal people and low castes. This very fact created a secular tradition of social rebellions and religious reform movements trying to break the traditional extreme social segregation embodied in the "divinely" legitimised castes of Hinduism. The modern form of these popular movements is a.o.t. the Naxalite rebellion which is controlling a part of the area called Dandakaranya and commands great political influence in vast swaths of the region. It is trying to push for community development in collective forms with considerable success.

Meanwhile the appetite of the globalised elites, both the domestic and the international ones are growing. The region is rich of natural resources for mining and forestry. In order to get hold on it the traditional communities  must be evicted from their lands. A  general warning must be given about  the Maoist-organized forces, say, The Revolutionary Democratic Front (RDF), i.e. a proto-state, in the area, that is in general an obstacle for a more libertarian development. But there are also libertarian tendencies within the popular fight.

Under the guise of the "war on terrorism" the elites have unleashed a deadly campaign of extinction with appalling atrocities like mass executions, beheadings, gang rapes etc. All this passes completely unnoticed from the global public opinion while India is adjured as a new economic "tiger", creating broad consumerist middle classes. About the other, dark side of the medal nobody wants to take notice of.

The Anarchist International has launched an appeal for urgently needed solidarity which main aspect is to make the  libertarian and popular fight known to the world.

Your solidarity and support to this historic struggle going on in the very heart of India can be in very many ways: You can come and lend your expertise by staying in the area for a few months, or contribute money, even small contributions will be appreciated, to, say, medicine and any other means that will be of use to the  people of the low castes and their  fight. We also request you to tell the world of what is becoming of the so-called largest democracy in the world, its in reality a murderous, totalitarian state socialist society, which is consciously being kept away from public scrutiny. It is important that the truth reaches the people of the country and the masses of the world at large. India is at a turning point, the Anarchist International stresses the terrible living conditions of ordinary Indians co-existing with the economical boom. Either India breaks with the statism and capitalist/economical plutarchist tendencies, or sectarianism and Hindu  totalitarian state socialism will prevail. This is a message of hope, but also fearful warnings.

India is as mentioned in reality a totalitarian state socialist society, far from real democracy. The degree of socialism is ca 50,5%, i.e. significant, and thus the degree of capitalism is ca 49,5%, i.e. not the significant, but still an important tendency. The gini-index is 32,5. As rule of the thumb a gini-index less than 35 indicates socialism. The degree of statism is ca 93,8% - very, very significant, i.e. the degree of autonomy is only ca 6,2%. This is mainly so due to the caste system. The authoritarian degree is ca 75%, and thus the libertarian degree is only ca 25%. India is ranked as no 130 on the ranking of countries according to authoritatian degree. It is more socialist than China (ranked as no 88), i.e. left fascist. India is in reality located in the sector of state-communism, in the marxist quadrant of the map, more authoritarian than Cuba (ranked as no 65), in the same sector. It is state-communist in all but the name. Low life expectancy at birth (years), low adult literacy rate and the caste system in general make the system horrible statist, there is very little autonomy. The system has a top heavy pyramid in rank, very much government, and is thus far from a "functioning anarchy" as some of the newsmedia have suggested. There are elections of rulers, yes, and if there were not elections the system would be even more authoritarian, but this does not change the ultra-authoritarian system significantly, the top heavy pyramid exists regardless of shifts on the top.

Key details of India's national elections in 2009: About 714 million voters were eligible to cast their ballots at more than 828,000 polling stations. Overall turnout was 59 to 60 percent. Major political players: Left-of-center Congress party which, since independence from Britain in 1947, has governed India for a total of more than four decades; Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party; Third Front: An alliance of communists, socialists, regional parties and caste-based parties. Main campaign issues: No central issues resonated with voters and most campaigning revolved around vague promises of jobs and prosperity. The communist totalitarian system at about 75% authoritarian degree is still going strong...

19.05.2009. Newly elected Congress lawmakers formally chose Prime Minister Manmohan Singh as their leader for a second term Tuesday, clearing the way for the swearing in of his new government this week. The Congress-led coalition captured 261 seats in India's 543-seat Parliament, far more than most analysts predicted, but still 11 short of a majority. On Tuesday however, two key regional parties - Bahujan Samaj Party and Samajwadi Party, which together will control 43 seats - offered to support Singh's government. Congress has governed for nearly 50 years of modern India's 61 years of independence. 22.05.2005. Mr Singh and a 19-member cabinet were sworn in. No significant changes in the system's fundamental parameters are expected.

10.10.2009. India intensifies fight against Maoist rebels. Indian authorities plan to use state police, paramilitaries and special squads to fight Maoist rebels, considered the biggest threat to internal security, a federal official said. Maoist guerrillas, known as Naxalites, have battled the government since the late 1960s. They enjoy support not only in the poorest and tribal communities, but also among youth and the intelligentsia, according to government officials. Indian authorities categorize the Naxalites this way: hardcore armed, local guerillas and Jan (public) militias. The government estimates there are 10,000 hardcore armed Maoists. Last year, 1,591 Maoist rebel attacks killed 721 people, government officials said. About 600 people have died so far this year in more than 1,400 rebel attacks. India recognizes that over time, the rebels have improved their equipment and honed tactics. In addition to targeting police, alleged police informers and people they call "class enemies," the rebels have placed greater emphasis on attacking infrastructure such as roads, bridges, railways, and power and telecommunication networks. The Naxalites, who began their movement in the West Bengal, now have influence in 20 of the country's 28 states, according to the government. The Anarchist International supports the libertarian opposition in India, and is against the Maoists/Naxalites, that represent an even more authoritarian system than the present totalitarian communist system in India.

---

Too little too late? Nations agree on steps to revive climate treaty

by AIIS 16.12.2007

The deal at the Bali-conference on the environmental issues came after the United States, facing sharp verbal attacks in a final open-door negotiating session, reversed its opposition to a last-minute amendment by India. "We've listened very closely to many of our colleagues here during these two weeks, but especially to what has been said in this hall today," Under Secretary of State Paula Dobriansky, who led the American delegation, told the assembled delegates. "We will go forward and join consensus," she said. The Bush administration had earlier made a significant change in policy, ending its long-held objection to the need to formally negotiate new steps to avoid climate dangers. This time, the United States agreed to set a deadline for an addendum to the original treaty, which was signed by Mr. Bush's father in 1992. The agreement notes the need for "urgency" in addressing climate change and recognizes that "deep cuts in global emissions will be required." Still, it does not bind the United States or any country to commitments on reducing greenhouse pollution. "It starts a negotiation that allows but doesn't require an outcome where the US takes a cap," or a national limit on greenhouse gases, said David Doniger, a former climate negotiator in the Clinton administration and the climate policy director of the Natural Resources Defense Council. The agreement sets the stage for some commitments by developing countries to reduce greenhouse emissions. But it includes no language making such steps mandatory. American negotiators here had pushed hard to get developing countries, including emerging economic giants like China and India, to agree to seek cuts while retaining flexibility on how to make them. The last-minute dispute Saturday was over the wording of commitments by developing countries.

The overall agreement, if completed by 2009, would also ensure continuity for parties to the Kyoto Protocol, the only existing addendum to the original climate treaty, which took effect in 2005. The Kyoto pact limits emissions by three dozen industrialized countries but has been rejected by the United States.Its emissions caps expire in 2012, and adherents, particularly European countries, were eager to start the process of setting new limits to sustain markets in emissions credits — a keystone of the protocol. The Bush administration is increasingly under pressure domestically to take action on global warming. Climate legislation is gaining momentum in the Democrat-controlled Congress and presidential candidates from both parties are generally more engaged on the subject. In April, the Supreme Court rejected the Bush administration's contention that carbon dioxide was not a pollutant and ordered it to re-examine the case for regulating carbon dioxide from vehicles. Dozens of states are moving ahead with caps on greenhouse gases. The differences in philosophy at the meeting were striking and fundamental. European Union negotiators said they favored specific government-imposed caps on emissions and wanted industrial countries to lead the way.

The United States favored relying on "aspirational" goals, research to advance nonpolluting energy technologies and a mix of measures, including mandatory steps like efficiency standards for vehicles and appliances — but all set by individual nations, not mandated by a global pact. Developing countries, a vaguely defined group that includes countries as different as China and Costa Rica, have long insisted that rich countries, which spent more than a century adding carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases to the atmosphere, should take the first step. The tenor of the conference improved markedly after European nations, frustrated with the United States, threatened on Thursday to boycott talks proposed by the Bush administration in Hawaii next month. Germany's environment minister, Sigmar Gabriel, who led the criticism of the United States earlier in the week, said Friday, "The climate in the climate convention has changed a little bit. "It's true that during the last night and during the negotiations America was more flexible than in the first part of the conference. "We very much appreciate this. Not only the Americans but also other parties."

Reuters reported Friday that the European Union had dropped a central demand that the guidelines for the agreement should include a reference to tough emissions targets for wealthy countries to meet by 2020. Coincidentally or not, the mood shifted after a speech Thursday by former Vice President Al Gore, who shared the Nobel Peace Prize this year for helping to alert the world to the danger of global warming. After declaring that the United States was "principally responsible for obstructing progress" in Bali, he urged delegates to agree to an open-ended deal that could be enhanced after President Bush left office. "Over the next two years the United States is going to be somewhere it is not now," Mr. Gore said to loud applause. "You must anticipate that."

Developing nations, notably China and India, stuck with their longstanding refusal to accept limits on their emissions, despite projections that they will soon become the dominant sources of climate-warming gases. Separately, participants agreed on a system that would compensate developing countries for protecting their rain forests, a plan that environmentalists described as an innovative effort to mitigate global warming. Rain forest destruction is a major source of carbon dioxide, and living rain forests, according to recent research, play an important role in absorbing the gas. Precisely how countries with large rain forests, like Indonesia and Brazil, would be compensated has not been fully worked out. United Nations officials said part of the financing would come from developed countries through aid and other financing would come from carbon credits traded under the Kyoto pact. The carbon market allows rich countries to receive credit toward their targets by investing in climate-friendly projects in poor countries.

Is it too little too late? Difficult to say by now, but the agreement could be clearer. More must be done to do away with the problem, but there is a realistic hope to solve it. We will put attention to the ECO -ANARCHIST MANIFESTO (EAM) at http://www.anarchy.no/eam.html  , and the The Green Anarchist International Association - GAIA , that have the fight against man-made global warming at the top of the agenda for anarchist direct actions. Regarding the struggle against manmade global warming, the eco-anarchists are in the forefront, and demand joint international cooperation to solve the problem.

Source: "Nations Agree on Steps to Revive Climate Treaty ", by THOMAS FULLER and ANDREW C. REVKIN, NY-TIMES December 16, 2007 and AIIS.

---

CONFEDERACIÓN GENERAL DEL TRABAJO
Gabinete de Prensa Confederal (20.12.2007)
C/ Sagunto 15, 1º planta – 28010 – Madrid
Teléfonos: 91 447 57 69 / 609 70 27 90 /  690 640 826
Fax: 91 445 31 32. Correo: prensa@cgt.org.es
www.cgt.es

CGT ante el Tratado de la Unión

El nuevo Tratado de la Unión es una Reforma del actualmente en vigor y aún es más antidemocrático en su gestación que el Proyecto de Constitución Europea, el cual, al menos tuvo la posibilidad de ser discuti do y validado por los ciudadanos de algunos países, por medio de referendos.

La UE , sus jefes de estado, su Comisión, han entendido que contar –aunque sea de forma muy limitada y controlada- con los ciudadanos tiene el riesgo de que éstos entiendan que el orden social que se constituye, nada tiene que ver con unas relaciones sociales basadas en el respeto de los derechos para todas las personas que habitan o trabajan en el espacio denominado UE.

El nuevo Tratado profundiza en la liberalización de todos los mercados de producción y de servicios y posibilita la aplicación práctica de la Directiva Bolkestein , siguiendo abierta la puerta a la privatización total de la sanidad, la educación, el agua y las pensiones.

Este Tratado cierra las estrategias Empresariales, fijadas en Lisboa 2000, basadas en la competitividad en un mundo cada vez más global y reafirmadas dichas estrategias por los Sindicatos CES (Confederación Europea de Sindicatos), en el programa de trabajo conjunto 2006-2008.

Estrategias que hacen desaparecer en la retórica y en la materialidad, los servicios públicos: sanidad, pensiones, ferrocarriles, educación, agua, vivienda, etc. e introduciendo el mercado de por medio tanto en su concepción, "servicios de interés general" como en su resolución (quien ahorre, tendrá una sanidad privada, una pensión complementaria, etc.).

El mercado como principio rector de la política, manifestada la misma en términos de relaciones económicas (la libre competencia y la libre circulación del dinero, como derechos intocables), en relaciones comerciales (protección de multinacionales en sus intercambios desiguales e injustos con otros países) y la apuesta decidida por las dinámicas de creciente financiarización de la sociedad en su conjunto.

Las políticas sociales, gasto público en prestaciones y coberturas sociales: pensiones, sanidad, dependencias, educación, vivienda, transportes públicos y modelos de movilidad, al igual que la fiscalidad, siguen sometidas al veto, haciendo imposible una política comunitaria al respecto, al tiempo que se permiten los paraísos fiscales dentro de la propia Unión.

Si la libre competencia (competitividad) es el principio rector, los mercados de trabajo y las políticas de empleo sólo pueden regirse por la regla de la desregulación laboral (flexibilización) y la precariedad integral de la fuerza de trabajo (vaciamiento de derechos laborales y sociales).

La Comisión adquiere el "poder absoluto" a través de las adecuadas políticas internas, directivas fundamentalmente, para garantizar "a las empresas europeas competitivas, acceso a los mercados mundiales y operar en ellos con seguridad" (Meter Mandelson-Comisario de Comercio).

Al igual que las necesidades sobre la mano de obra extra-comunitaria, de la Europa que "envejece", son tratadas desde la lógica del mercado y la doble moral, por una parte políticas desregulación de una mano de obra necesaria y suficiente para garantizar el tipo de trabajo precario de que requiere la competitividad y por otra, políticas de negación de derechos de ciudadanía que, desde la represión y control, permanenticen las relaciones desiguales, injustas y neo-coloniales de las relaciones Norte Sur y, sobre todo, el área de influencia euro-mediterránea.

El empeoramiento con respecto a lo que hubiera sido un Tratado en toda regla, revestido de "Constitución Europea", se encuentra en algo que en su momento fue "vendido" a la ciudadanía como el mantenimiento de un modelo diferenciador de Europa con respecto a EEUU, es decir su Estado de Bienestar o social de mercado, condensado en la Carta de Derechos Fundamentales, aparece con serias dudas jurídicas, más allá de no recoger de forma vinculante los derechos sociales.

CGT before the Treaty of  the Union

The new Treaty of  the Union  is a reform that is still more antidemocratic in its gestation than the Project of European Constitution, which, at least had the possibility to be discussed and validated by the citizens of some countries, through referenda. 

The EU, their heads of state and their Commission, have understood that to count – although be of form very limited and controlled - with the citizens, has the risk that these understand that the social order that is constituted,  has nothing to do with social relations based on the respect of the rights for all the people that inhabit, or work in, the space called EU. 

The new Treaty deepens the liberalization of all the markets of production and of services and enables the practical application of the  Bolkestein Directive, continuing to open the door to the total privatization of the health, the education, the water and the pensions. 

This Treaty closes the Business strategies, set in Lisbon 2000, based on the competitiveness in a world increasingly more global and reaffirmed happinesses strategies by the Unions CES (European Confederation of Unions), in the program of joint work 2006-2008. 

Strategies that cause that they disappear in the rhetoric and in the outward appearance, the public utilities: health, pensions, railroads, education, water, dwelling, etc. and introducing the market in between so much in its conception, "services of general interest" as in its resolution (who save, will have a private health, a complementary pension, etc.). 

The market as principal principle of the politics, declared the same in terms of economic relations (the free competition and the free circulation of the money, like rights untouchables), in trade relations (protection of multinationals in its uneven and unjust exchanges with other countries) and the determined bet by the dynamics of growing financialization of the company in its entirety. 

The social politics, public expense in benefits and welfare: pensions, health, dependences, education, dwelling, public transportations and models of mobility, just like the fiscality, they continue submitted to the veto, doing impossible a common politics on the matter, to the time that the tax havens inside the own Union are permitted.  If the free competition (competitiveness) is the principal principle, the labor market and the politics of employment only can be governed for the rule of the labor deregulation (flexibilization) and the integral precariousness of the labor force (asset stripping of social and labor rights). 

The Commission acquires the "absolute power" through the adequate political internal, guidelines fundamentally, to guarantee "to the competitive European businesses, access to the world markets and to operate in them with security" (Meter Mandelson - Commissioner of Commerce). 

Just like the needs on the extra-common labor, of the Europe that "ages", are treaties based on the logic of the market and the double morale, by political deregulation of a sufficient and necessary labor to guarantee the type of precarious work that requires the competitiveness, and negation of citizenship rights in politics,  based on repression and control, uneven, unjust and neo-colonial of the South North relations and, above all, the area of euro-Mediterranean influence. 

The deterioration with regard to what to have been a Treaty in every rule, covered with "European Constitution", is found in something that in its moment was "sold" to the citizenship as the maintenance of a distinguishing model of Europe with regard to US, that is to say its State of Welfare or social market, condensed in the Fundamental Bill of rights, appears with serious legal doubts, beyond binding form of the social rights. 

COMUNICADO - LA DIRECTIVA DE RETORNO - INSTAURA EL FASCISMO EN EUROPA

Hoy es el día de la vergüenza, el día europeo de la caza de la  persona inmigrante, el día en que los derechos humanos dejaron de ser  universales. Hoy ha sido aprobada la Directiva sobre la detención y  la expulsión de las personas extranjeras por el Parlamento Europeo.,  en su redactado aprobado anteriormente por los gobiernos de la Unión  Europea.

La Directiva de la Vergüenza se construye básicamente sobre dos  medidas represivas: la generalización antidemocrática de encierro arbitrario hasta 18 meses de las personas sin papeles;  y el retorno  forzoso sin posibilidad de volver a pisar suelo europea durante 5 años. Europa se transforma en una fortaleza militarizada al tiempo que un  paraíso para el movimiento de capitales, productos y servicios, y  militariza y criminaliza el simple hecho de ser inmigrante sin  recursos ni papeles, seres humanos que serán forzados a retornar, sin  posibilidad de volver a pisar suelo europeo, como si de peligrosos 
delincuentes se tratase.

La Directiva de Retorno recién aprobada, constituye la expresión  máxima del retroceso calculadamente diseñado por las élites políticas y económicas europeas en materia de derechos humanos. Esta agresión se centra ahora en la legitimización de la inexistencia de  derechos para las personas migrantes, para quienes tenemos preparados cárceles especiales sin garantías jurídicas y con tiempos de detención arbitrarios además del retorno forzoso sin posibilidad de  volver. Pero una vez dado este paso ¿quién asegura que en breve plazo no eliminen derechos fundamentales a quienes ostentamos el  dudoso título de ser ciudadanos/as?

Ahora con más ahínco y menos trabas las fuerzas de seguridad de los países de la UE podrán dedicarse con impunidad a la caza del  inmigrante, deporte deleznable de tintes fascistas iniciado en la Italia de Berlusconi, pero que con algo más de hipocresía el resto de países europeos está gustoso de poner en práctica. Dentro de poco veremos las estadísticas de esta indigna y particular olimpíadas, en las que se disputa el primer puesto de ser el país que más inmigrantes cace y expulse. Mucho nos tememos que los primeros puestos andarán entre el reino de España y la república de Italia.

Pero la vergüenza de este día, no la ostentan sólo los gobiernos y europarlamentarios, es sin duda la vergüenza de todos y todas, de quienes somos europeos/as, de las sociedades embriagadas de consumismo y miedo, es la vergüenza de nuestra incapacidad para dar respuesta al capitalismo totalitario de una UE, que más allá de la crisis provocada por el no irlandés al nuevo Tratado, está dispuesta a imponer su gobierno antidemocrático de las multinacionales y de las finanzas por encima de los derechos y necesidades de las personas.

El problema no reside en la Directiva de Retorno, ni en la Directiva de las 65 horas, el problema es la UE como proyecto político del  capitalismo globalizado y esclavizador de países, pueblos,  trabajadores/as e inmigrantes.

CGT reitera su compromiso en la denuncia y en la lucha contra la UE, y nos seguimos preguntando "UE, ¿para qué?, ¿para quién?". Y  las respuestas son desgraciadamente tozudas: para crear una superpotencia militarizada y antidemocrática y para los ricos de la política, el comercio, la industria y las finanzas.

Unamos esfuerzos contra la UE del capital y la guerra, contra la  precariedad y la exclusión, contra la distribución desigual de los derechos y de la riqueza. Este el nuestro único camino.

Este sábado 21 hay manifestaciones y concentraciones en distintas ciudades contra la Directiva de Retorno. Hacemos un  llamamiento a  participar y movilizarnos en todas ellas, y en las próximas movilizaciones que los colectivos inmigrantes organicen.

Secretaría de Acción Social – Comité Confederal CGT 18.01.2008

CGT: Communiqué - The Returns Directive - It establishes the fascism in Europe

Today is the day of the shame, the European day of the hunt of the immigrants, the day in which the human rights stopped being universal.  Today the Returns Directive on the detention and the expulsion of the foreign people was approved by the European Parliament, and approved previously by the governments of the European Union.  The Returns Directive of Shame is built basically on two repressive measures: The antidemocratic generalization of arbitrary confinement to 18 months of "irregular" migrants; and the compulsory return without possibility to return to Europe for 5 years.  

Europe is transformed into a  militarized fortress and a paradise for the capital  movement,  products and services, and criminalizes the simple fact to be an immigrant without resources, human beings that will be forced to return  without possibility to step in again to the EU,  and treated as if they were dangerous delinquents.  The Returns Directive recently decided upon, constitutes the maximum expression of a calculated backward movement designed by the political and economic elite of EU in the matter of human rights.

This aggression itself center now in the legitimization of the non-existence of rights for the migrant people, for whom we have prepared legally unsecured special jails,  with arbitrary detention besides the compulsory return without possibility to return. But once this step  is taken, will they within a brief time limit, eliminate the fundamental rights also to whom we show off the doubtful title to be citizens? 

Now with more urge and less bonds the security forces of the countries of the EU will be able, with impunity, to hunt down the immigrants, as a sport of fascist colors initiated in the Italy of Berlusconi, but that with slightly more than hypocrisy the remainder of European countries are pleased to put in practice.  Before long we will see the statistics of this unworthy and private Olympiads, on which country that will have the first position in immigrant hunt and expel. 

A lot of us are afraid that the first positions will walk between the kingdom of Spain and the republic of Italy.  But the shame of this day, that the governments and members of the european parliament show, is without doubt the shame of all Europeans, of the drunken companies of consumerism and fear, it is the shame of our incapacity to give answer to the totalitarian capitalism of EU, that beyond the crisis caused by the no vote by the Irish against the new Treaty, is willing to impose the will of the multinationals and of the finances above the rights and needs of the people. 

The problem does not reside in the Returns Directive, neither in the Directive of 65 hours, the problem is the EU as political project of globalized capitalism and statism and repression in countries, towns and  industries of immigrants. CGT reiterates its commitment in this accusation and in the fight against the EU, and we continue asking "EU, why? For whom?". And the answers are unfortunately stubborn: to create a militarized and antidemocratic superpower for the rich of the politics, the commerce, the industry and the finances. 

We unite efforts against the EU of the capital and the war, against the precariousness and the exclusion, against the uneven distribution of the rights and of the wealth.  This is our only road. 

This Saturday 21 there are demonstrations and concentrations in different cities against the Returns Directive. We do a calling to participate and to mobilize us in all of them, and in the next mobilizations that the collective immigrants organize.

Office of the secretary of Social Action – Confederal Committee CGT 18.06.2008

The International Workers of the World supports CGT's actions against the Returns Directive, see http://www.anarchy.no/iwwai.html .

PS 19.06.2008: Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez threatened not to sell oil to European Union countries that follow new rules on immigration, but oil analysts daid the threat was largely symbolic since no European country buys oil from Venezuela. Instead, Venezuela sends what crude it does export to Europe to its own refineries there. "Our oil shouldn't go to those countries" that voted for the EU's new policy, approved on Wednesday of detaining and deporting illegal immigrants, Chavez said in a televised address from Caracas. The legislation lays out re-entry bans and maximum 18-month detention periods but also includes legal safeguards. The directive "will encourage the voluntary return of illegal immigrants but otherwise lay down minimum standards for their treatment," according to the EU in a news release. Parliament adopted the measure by a vote of 369 to 197, with 106 abstentions. Britain and Ireland have not adopted the policy. 20.06.2008: Update from CGT http://www.nodo50.org/Especial-Contra-la-Directiva-de-la.html . 21.06.2008: The anarchists, including anarchosyndicalists, step up their direct actions against the Returns Directive.

---

New year greetings 2008 etc.

THE ANARCHIST INTERNATIONAL
www.anarchy.no

A Merry Winter Solstice (Jul) and a Happy New Year

See and listen to Julenissen, home adress  Drøbak, in the Anarchy of Norway, at: http://www.thecompassgroup.biz/merryxmas.swf

The AI wishes all fellows and friends a Merry Winter Solstice (Christmas) and a Happy New Year!

Best regards H. Fagerhus for AI
21.12.2007

PS. In the holidays, feel free to take the updated basic course of Anarchism and other -isms at: http://www.anarchy.no/course1.html

***

Ai compagni e alle compagne dell'IFA (AI)

Un saluto ed un augurio per un 2008 di lotta e di vittorie
dai compagni e dalle compagne dell'USI AIT e del Circolo Anarchico Durruti
che questa sera festeggeranno con una cena sociale il solstizio d'inverno

B U O N    2 0 0 8

Segreteria Romana USI AIT

To all of the female and male companions of the IFA (AI)

A greeting and an omen for a 2008 of struggle and of victories from
the male and female companions of the USI-AIT and of the Anarchic Circle Durruti,
that this evening will celebrate with a social supper the solstice of winter.

Best wishes for 2 0 0 8

Roman secretary office of USI AIT
(posted by Alex)

***

Please tell me:
  What are the greatest music creations
your "belief" has inspired to!
A blessed Christmas and New year!
Per Einar
---
About music creations inspirited by anarchism - the satirical punk-rock opera, "Balladen om Exterazy
Grax - En anarko-pønk opera", may be mentioned: It is written about it in
Trygve Mathiesen's: Tre grep og sannheten - Norks punk 1977-1980, Vega
forlag, Oslo 2007

Regards H. Fagerhus

---

Anarchism and borders

By A. Quist 22.12.2007

The state's and national borders as we see today are not particularely anarchist. But are anarchisms really without borders? I think not. The basic unit in most anarchisms is the commune. For a society close to the anarchist ideal, Kropotkin suggests: "The "Commune" is no linger a territorial agglomeration; but...a synonym for the grouping of equals, knowing no borders, no walls. The social Commune... will cease to be clearly defined. Each group of the Commune will necessarily be attracted to similar groups of other Communes; they will group together, federate with each other, by bonds at least as solid as those tying them to their fellow townsmen; (they will) constitute a Commune of interests, of which members will be diseminated through a thousand cities and villages. Each individual will find satisfaction of his needs only in grouping together with other individuals (that) have the same tastes and living in a hundred other Communes." [From "Words of a Rebel", quoted by P. Berman in "Quotations from the Anarchists", New York, 1972, p. 171.] " In a society developed on these lines, the voluntary associations which already now begin to cover all the fields of human activity would take a still greater extension so as to substitute themselves for the state in all its functions." [From "Anarchism", by Pjotr Kropotkin, The Encyclopaedia Britannica , 1910.]

But although not necessarely a limited geographical area, the commune is not absolutely borderless. There will be some persons that are members, and some that are not. Other anarchists, as, say, Proudhon operates with a commune based on municipality.

"[Anarchy] ... the ideal of human government... centuries will pass before that ideal is attained, but our law is to go in that direction, to grow unceasingly nearer to that end, and thus I would uphold the principle of federation. [2] ...it is unlikely that all traces of government or authority will disappear... [3] By the word [anarchy] I wanted to indicate the extreme limit of political progress. Anarchy is... a form of government or constitution in which public and private consciousness, formed through the development of science and law, is alone sufficient to maintain order and guarantee all liberties... The institutions of the police, preventative and repressive methods officialdom, taxation etc., are reduced to a minimum... monarchy and intensive centralization disappear, to be replaced by federal institutions and a pattern of life based upon the commune [i.e. municipality]. [4] Since the two principles, Authority and Liberty, which underlie all forms organized society, are on the one hand contrary to each other, in a perpetual state of conflict, and on the other can neither eliminate each other nor be resolved, some kind of compromise between the two is necessary. Whatever the system favored, whether it be monarchical, democratic, communist or anarchist, its length of life will depend to the extent to which it has taken the contrary principle into account. [5] ...that monarchy and democracy, communism and anarchy, all of them unable to realize themselves in the purity of their concepts, are obliged to complement one another by mutual borrowings. There is surely something here to dampen the intolerance of fanatics who cannot listen to a contrary opinion... They should learn, then, poor wretches, that they are themselves necessarily disloyal to their principles, that their political creeds are tissues of inconsistencies... contradiction lies at the root of all programs. [6] ...writers have mistakenly introduced a political assumption as false as it is dangerous, in failing to distinguish practice from theory, the real, from the ideal... every real government is necessarily mixed... [7] ...few people defend the present state of affairs, but the distaste for utopias is no less widespread. [8] The people indeed are not at all utopian... they have no faith in the absolute and they reject every apriori system... [9]" By Pierre Joseph Proudhon: 2. Woodcock, George. P.J. Proudhon , p. 249; 3. Selected Writings p. 105 ; 4. Ibid 92; 5. Ibid 103; 6. The Federal Principle, p. 21; 7. Ibid 21; 8. op cit 56 ; 9. General Idea of Revolution in the 19th Century , Freedom, 1927, p. 76. From http://www.anarchy.no/proudhon.html .

Furthermore, internationalism is a basic anarchist principle, see http://www.anarchy.no/anarchism.html . The basis for internationalism, as opposed to nationalism, is never the less national geographical units. The Anarchist International has thus the following general principle, one federation in each country. International decisions, matters concerning all federations and members directly and concrete, are taken by the Anarchist International. The countries will thus have borders also in an anarchy of high degree, although not as strict as the national borders of today. This has something to do with decentralization and autonomy, two other basic anarchist principles, see http://www.anarchy.no/anarchism.html . Anarchism is about self-management and self-administration. "Anarchy" doesn't mean "without coordination, management, administration, etc.". Anarchy is management, coordination and administration etc. without ruling and thus without rulers. A "world commune", one commune for the whole world in general, will be nearly impossible to self manage/administrate, it will be bureaucratical, not efficient and thus not anarchist. Are anarchisms really without borders? The answer is NO!

---

The situation in Pakistan and its place on the economic-political map

by S. Olsen 28.12.2007 - Updated

IIFOR has investigated the situation in Pakistan in a structurally, long term perspective. As a rule of the thumb a gini-index less than 35 indicates socialism. Pakistan has a gini-index at 33, but low efficiency, a GDP per capita at only  555 US $  (2003), and thus the degree of socialism is estimated to ca 50,3%, i.e. significant (the degree of capitalism is ca 49,7%).  The degree of statism is estimated to ca 94,7%  (degree of autonomy ca 5,3%)  This very, very significant degree of statism is due to a relatively low life expectancy  at birth (years), a low adult literacy rate (48,7) and a highly repressive regime in general, also with a lot of ochlarchy (mob rule broadly defined, terrorism included).  Pakistan is ranked as no 136 on the ranking of countries according to libertarian degree, with a libertarian degree at ca 24,4%, and an a uthoritarian degree at ca 75,6%, see http://www.anarchy.no/ranking.html   It is a totalitarian, ultra-authoritarian regime, placed in the state-communist sector of the marxist quadrant on the economic-political map, close to left-fascism, see http://www.anarchy.no/a_e_p_m.html  . A movement towards a  parliamentary democratic system will probably not influence the structural parameters of the system in Pakistan significantly, it will not be real democratic, and thus the system will most likely stay state-communist in the coming years, with a libertarian degree at only ca 24,4% . (28.12.2007)

We strongly condemn this terrorist act and present our deepest condolences to the family and friends of Benazir Bhutto

Benazir Bhutto died Thursday after a suicide bombing at a political rally in Rawalpindi, Pakistan. The Anarchy of Norway strongly condemns this cowardly act by murderous extremists who are trying to undermine the tendencies towards democracy in Pakistan. Those who committed this crime must be brought to justice. Bhutto served twice as Pakistan's prime minister between 1988 and 1996. She had returned to Pakistan from an eight-year exile October 18. Her homecoming parade in Karachi was also targeted by a suicide attacker, killing more than 140 people. On that occasion she narrowly escaped injury. We are deeply shocked by the news of the latest attack in Rawalpindi which has claimed the life of Benazir Bhutto and killed at least 15 other people.  Bhutto knew the risks of her return to campaign but was convinced that her country needed her. We urge Pakistan to honor Benazir Bhutto's memory by continuing with the tendencies towards a democratic process for which she so bravely gave her life.  We strongly condemn this terrorist act and present our deepest condolences to the family and friends of Benazir Bhutto.

For Norges Anarkistråd  (NACO)
Landsråd S. Olsen
27.12.2007

See also http://www.dagsavisen.no/utenriks/article328635.ece

16.01.2008: Flagrant violations of core labor standards in Pakistan

All core labor standards, even if ratified, are violated massively and flagrantly in Pakistan. The right of freedom of association is violated systematically and there is insufficient protection against anti-union discrimination. The right to strike cannot be exercised and workers in the country's three export processing zones do not enjoy the right to form a trade union, bargain collectively or strike. Hazardous forms of child labor include street vending, surgical instrument manufacturing, deep sea fishing, leather manufacturing, brick making, production of soccer balls, and carpet weaving. Bonded labor is a major issue despite legislation that should outlawed the practice. The report equally recalls that Pakistan is a source, transit and destination country for trafficked people and that currently, women and children are those most vulnerable to such practices.  Women suffer from discrimination in the workplace. While harassment is a serious problem, there is no law in force to combat it yet. The Anarchist International and NACO call on the government of Pakistan to redress its non compliance with the ILO core labor standards.

2009: Still an ultra-authoritarian state-communist system

01.01.2009: IIFOR has been monitoring the situation in Pakistan after returning to an elected government. Election of ultra-authoritarian rulers does not make the system significantly less authoritarian. The fundamental parameters of the Pakistani system have not changed significantly so far. The system is still state-communist with tendencies of rivaling polyarchy and ochlarchy, and a libertarian degree at only ca 24,4%. For the people seen as a class as opposed to the superiors, nothing is changed.

16.02.2009: Shariah law in Swat valley. The government announced Monday that it would accept a system of Islamic law, Shariah courts, in the Swat valley and agreed to a truce, effectively conceding the area as a Taleban sanctuary and suspending a faltering effort by the army to crush the insurgents. The concessions to the militants, who now control about 70 percent of the region just 100 miles from the capital, were criticized by Pakistani analysts as a capitulation by a government desperate to stop Taleban abuses and a military embarrassed at losing ground after more than a year of intermittent fighting. About 3,000 Taleban militants have kept 12,000 government troops at bay and terrorized the local population with floggings and the burning of schools. In legislative elections a year ago, the people of Swat, a region that has 1.3 million residents, voted overwhelmingly for the secular Awami National Party. Since then, the Taleban have singled out elected politicians with suicide bomb attacks and chased virtually all of them from the valley. Several hundred thousand residents have also fled the fighting. The authorities in the North-West Frontier Province, which includes Swat, argued that the Shariah courts were not the same as strict Islamic law. The new laws, for instance, would not ban education of females or impose other strict tenets espoused by the Taleban in Pakistan and Afghanistan, they assumed.

22.02.2009: A top official in Pakistan's troubled Swat Valley was kidnapped Sunday, a day after a cease-fire between the government and Taleban militants was supposed to go into effect. Kushal Khan was on his way to take up his new post as the District Coordination Officer when unknown gunmen kidnapped him and six members of his security guards near Mingora, the valley's main city, officials said. Khan was nabbed a day after the provincial government declared a permanent ceasefire agreement with Taleban militants in the valley. Yet, hours after the announcement, Maulana Fazlullah,  the Taleban commander in the area,  was playing down the agreement with aggressive rhetoric in a radio broadcast. Fazlullah said militants will continue their fight to impose Islamic law, or sharia, in the region.  Swat Valley, located in North West Frontier Province, was once one of Pakistan's biggest tourist destinations. It is situated near the Afghanistan border and about 186 miles (300 km) from the capital city of Islamabad.

The valley boasted the country's only ski resort until it was shut down after militants overran the area. The area was also a draw for trout-fishing enthusiasts and visitors to the ancient Buddhist ruins in the area. In recent months, however, militants have unleashed a wave of violence that has claimed hundreds of lives across the North West Frontier Province. The militants want to require veils for women, beards for men and ban music and television. The fighting has displaced nearly half of Swat's population, officials said. The central government has long exerted little control in the area, but it launched an intense military offensive in late July to flush out militants. As retaliation for the military presence, the Taleban carried out a series of deadly bombings, beheadings and kidnappings,  and said the attacks will continue until the troops pull out. On Saturday, the government of the province said it had reached a deal with the Taleban for a permanent ceasefire. It marked a major concession by the Pakistani government in its attempt to hold off Taleban militants. The agreement means boys' schools will reopen on Monday and camps will be set up for Swat residents who have fled the fighting or whose homes had been destroyed. The anarchists call for revolt, militia and army action against these Taleban fascist, terrorist rulers. Do away with this Taleban sanctuary.

24.02.2009: Taleban Swat truce "indefinite". Taleban insurgents in the troubled north-western Swat valley of Pakistan have announced an indefinite ceasefire. The announcement follows a deal struck last week between a radical cleric and authorities that brings Sharia law in return for an end to the insurgency. The latest truce announcement comes a day after militants in Bajaur district called a unilateral ceasefire with security forces there. The announcement comes a day after the army confirmed it was halting military operations in the region, although not leaving. Swat has been the scene of bloody clashes between militants and government forces since November 2007. More than 1,000 civilians have died in shelling by the army or from beheadings sanctioned by the Taleban. Thousands more have been displaced. The Taleban have also destroyed nearly 200 schools, most of them for girls, during a sustained campaign against secular education in Swat. An earlier peace agreement broke down in mid-2008. Tthere is concern that this peace deal will also not last, with some analysts believing the Taleban want to control territory, not just amend the legal system.

26.04.2009: Pakistan again battles Taleban. Pakistan sent helicopter gunships and troops to attack Taleban militants Sunday in a district covered by the "peace deal".  At least 31 people were killed in the offensive, which sent some residents of Lower Dir district fleeing carrying small children and few belongings. Farhatullah Babar, spokesman for Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari, insisted the offensive did not render the "peace agreement". He said the offensive Sunday had nothing to do with American pressure. "There is no question of pressure by anybody," Babar said.

28.04.2009: Pakistani jets and choppers bomb Taleban near capital. Pakistani jets and attack helicopters bombed Taleban positions in a district near the capital Tuesday, the military said, in an expansion of an offensive against militants seemingly emboldened by a much-criticized "peace deal". The terrorists moved into the region this month from the nearby Swat Valley. They set up checkpoints, patrolled streets and warned locals to abide by strict interpretations of Islam. The offensive will cause major strains on an already shaky "peace deal" in the Malakand region, to which Buner belongs. The truce has been widely viewed in the West and by anarchists in general as a surrender to militants seen as slowly expanding their grip over the nuclear-armed nation. Pakistan has launched at least a dozen operations against militants in the Afghan border region over the last five years. Officials have frequently claimed success, but the mostly lawless, mountainous area remains a haven for extremists who use it to stage attacks on foreign troops in neighboring Afghanistan.

Hundreds of thousands of people have fled the area and scores of civilians have been killed in the operations. The country has more than 100,000 troops on the border, but analysts say they have little experience in guerrilla operations, having been trained to fight a conventional war against long-standing enemy India on the country's eastern flank. There are also major questions about the country's will to fight the insurgency, with politicians split on the seriousness of the threat they pose despite scores of bloody suicide attacks across the country in recent years. Frequently, Muslim leaders and politicians blame the militancy on the country's alliance with Washington and direct their anger at US drone strike at militant targets in the northwest. The Malakand deal imposes Islamic law in the region in exchange for peace with militants who have waged a violent two-year campaign in the Swat Valley. It apparently emboldened the Swat militants to go beyond the valley's borders, at least under the guise of enforcing Islamic law. Many of the Taleban were reported to have left Buner starting on Friday. But Interior Minister Rehman Malik said earlier Tuesday that those remaining must leave or the government would take action. The anarchists again call for revolt, militia and army action against these Taleban fascist, terrorist rulers. Do away with this Taleban sanctuary.

Terrorists moving from Afghan border to Africa. There is growing evidence that battle-hardened extremists are filtering out of safe havens along the Pakistan-Afghanistan border and into East Africa, bringing sophisticated terrorist tactics that include suicide attacks. The alarming shift, according to US military and counterterrorism officials, fuels concern that Somalia is increasingly on a path to become the next Afghanistan - a sanctuary where al-Qaeda-linked groups could train and plan their threatened attacks against the western world. So far, officials say the number of foreign fighters who have moved from southwest Asia and the Afghanistan-Pakistan border region to the Horn of Africa is small, perhaps two to three dozen.

29.04.2009: Obama administration pushes to fund Pakistan army. Pakistan's army could soon receive US funding to battle insurgents and terrorists along its western border. The Obama administration said Wednesday that Pakistan currently is unable to eliminate threats in Taleban and al-Qaeda safe havens near the Afghanistan border. Top Pentagon and State Department officials told a House panel that Pakistan's army would get part of a proposed $400 million fund to use for training and equipment to fight insurgents. The US already is aiding Pakistan special forces and frontier militias. Several Democrats voiced concern about funding the Pakistani army when it has long been focused on India instead of insurgents.

Pakistan still conflicted over battling Taleban. Pakistan's offensive to push Taleban militants from a district near the capital drew little criticism from local politicians and clerics - a sign that insurgents may have gone too far in trying to expand their reign in the region. But despite that tacit acceptance, the nuclear-armed country remains far from consensus on the seriousness of the extremist threat it faces - and how best to fight it. The army said Wednesday that it has retaken the main town in Buner, a district 60 miles from Islamabad, which Taleban fighters overwhelmed this month in the wake of a peace deal that established Islamic law in the Swat Valley. The military said more than 50 Taleban fighters and one member of the security forces died in the offensive launched Tuesday amid US pressure.

Elsewhere in Pakistan on Wednesday, at least 20 people were killed and two dozen vehicles torched in ethnic violence in the southern city of Karachi, officials said. The insurgents' advance into Buner had heightened concern in Pakistan about the militants' growing reach, once largely limited to the remote, semiautonomous tribal belt. Even some pro-Taleban religious party leaders criticized recent statements by militants and their sympathizers that democracy and elections are un-Islamic. Whether that will translate into sustained action is another matter. Anti-Americanism is widespread in Pakistan, a mood exacerbated by US missile strikes in northwest regions bordering Afghanistan. One suspected American strike killed five alleged militants Wednesday in the South Waziristan tribal region, intelligence officials said. The US has launched some three dozen such strikes since August.

Public support for fellow Muslims and a lack of agreement about what Taleban rule would mean also make it difficult for the US-allied government in Islamabad to rally public support against the insurgents. "All the destabilization and anarchy in the region is because of the Americans' aggressive and violent policies," said Nadir Khan, a 41-year-old merchant in Karachi. "The solution is that Americans should quit Afghanistan immediately. Extremist forces would themselves die down ultimately." Nadir Khan gets a Brown Crad from IAT-APT for falsely calling the ultra-authoritarian regimes in the region with strong tendencies of rivaling polyarchy and ochlarchy (mob rule broadly defined), i.e. archies - anarchy. It is not anarchy.

But militant activity has seemed like the norm in recent years in Pakistan. In March, two audacious attacks occurred in the eastern city of Lahore in Punjab province, Pakistan's most populous, one on a visiting Sri Lankan cricket team, the other on police academy in the eastern city of Lahore. In September last year, militants bombed the Marriott Hotel in Islamabad, killing 54 people and further shocking the country - some labeled it Pakistan's 9/11.

02.05.2009: Militants attacked a Pakistani security post near the Afghan border Saturday, triggering a battle that left 13 assailants and two troops dead, an official said. The assault in the Mohmand tribal region - where Pakistan's army recently declared victory over militants who had begun to threaten the nearby city of Peshawar - also wounded three troops, said Syed Ahmad Jan, a senior administrator in Mohmand. "Our security forces returned fire after coming under attack this morning, and when the insurgents escaped they left the bodies of 13 of their comrades," Jan said. Pakistani generals claimed earlier this year to have dismantled Taleban mini-states in Mohmand and the neighboring Bajur region, from where insurgents were attacking US troops in Afghanistan as well as Pakistani forces and officials. Militants still control much of the tribal belt along the mountainous frontier, where US officials say al-Qaeda chief Osama bin Laden is probably still hiding, and have sought to expand toward previously peaceful areas. Pakistani counterinsurgency efforts are currently focused on Buner, a district much closer to the capital that was infiltrated last month by Taleban militants.

03.05.2009: Rising tensions threaten Pakistan, Taleban peace. Pakistan's army and the Taleban blamed each other Sunday for a rise in tensions that threatened to destroy a much-criticized peace deal, just days before the Pakistani president heads to Washington for talks with President Barack Obama. The army accused militants in the Swat Valley of looting, attacking infrastructure and killing one soldier. A Taleban spokesman said militants will start patrolling Swat's main town, and acknowledged that they cut the throats of two soldiers as revenge for the army killing two insurgents. Even as the government and the militants hardened their positions, officials in Pakistan's northwest sought to keep the peace deal alive, insisting that the pact retains, at the very least, symbolic value. Officials announced Saturday that they had set up an Islamic appeals court as their part of the deal. A speedier justice system has long been a demand of Swat residents, and setting up the court takes away a grievance that militants have exploited, officials say. By carrying out their part of the agreement, officials say, the government can gain more support from the public to take action against the Taleban if the militants violate the pact. Many Swat residents desperate for a stop to the fighting welcomed the deal, even if it didn't evict the Taleban. Still, the army's harsh stance does not guarantee a return to fighting in Swat itself. Some two years of clashes between the two sides killed hundreds and displaced up to one-third of Swat's 1.5 million residents before the peace deal was crafted. The army, which has struggled in the field of counterinsurgency, could not keep the militants from taking control of most of the valley. It's unclear that it has the capacity to defeat the Swat Taleban now or the stomach to try.

05.05.2009: Taleban links up with other Pakistani militants. Coordinated attacks - along with threats to women, shops selling CDs and barbers - suggest that the Taleban are bleeding out of their traditional havens in the Northwest Frontier Province into Pakistan's Punjab heartland, home to more than half of the country's 180 million people. A growing terror nexus threatens to engulf this nuclear-armed country, with Pakistan's previously fragmented militant fringe joining forces against the weak civilian government of President Asif Ali Zardari. Although the country does not appear to be at imminent risk of falling under militant control, many government sympathizers are alarmed at the speed with which the insurgency has spread in recent months - as well as the patchy response from the country's stretched police and army. The Taleban already have de facto rule of the northwest's Swat Valley and are advancing elsewhere with increasingly bold attacks, emboldened by a government peace deal that has been criticized by the anarchists, USA, a.o., - and is now close to collapse. A Pakistani minister says the government expects up to 500,000 people to flee fighting between the army and the Taleban in the northwestern valley. Information minister for the northwest, Mian Iftikhar Hussain, says authorities are preparing six camps to accommodate those expected to flee the Swat Valley in the coming days. Witness and officials say fighting between troops and militants broke out in Swat on Tuesday and that hundreds were fleeing.

07.05.2009. Fighting in the Swat Valley and surrounding districts began last week after a three-month-old peace deal collapsed. According to military figures, scores of militants have been killed. There has been no official word on civilian casualties, but at least 45,000 people - and probably many more - have fled, creating a humanitarian emergency. The Swat Taleban are estimated to have up to 7,000 fighters - many with training and battle experience - equipped with rocket-propelled grenades, explosives and automatic weapons. They are up against some 15,000 troops who, until recent days, had been confined to their barracks under the peace deal. The military is relying on helicopter gunships, aerial bombings and artillery while avoiding close combat - tactics it has used before with little success. While it is still early in the battle for the Swat Valley, some fear the campaign will follow the pattern of previous offensives in the frontier zone, which have been more limited and ended inconclusively after heavy collateral damage in towns and villages and massive displacement of the population. "If the government, the army wants to control and crush the Taleban, why don't they send ground troops to flush them out?" said Yar Mohammad, a 50-year-old stone mason who fled the valley and was in a refugee camp Thursday. "Why are they only shelling, which hurts the public most of all and creates anti-government feeling?"

08.05.2009. A Pakistani offensive against militants in the Swat Valley has displaced some 200,000 people recently, the UN says. A spokesman for the UN's refugee agency UNHCR said another 300,000 were already on the move or about to flee. Added to the more than 550,000 who had already fled, this threatened to create one of the world's biggest displacement crises, the UN says. Pakistani spokesman Gen Athar Abbas said the government had taken measures to provide for the civilians fleeing. But reports suggest some civilians are being prevented from leaving militant-held areas. Pakistani Prime Minister Yusuf Raza Gilani vowed on Thursday to "eliminate militants and terrorists" from Swat, a bastion of Taleban rule. A full-scale offensive had begun on Friday, with helicopter gunships blasting militant strongholds from the air and troops conducting operations on the ground. Despite now abandoned attempts to secure a peace deal in and around Swat, the area - close to the border with Afghanistan - has long been riven with tensions. Gen Abbas said that the military's objective in this now fully fledged offensive was to eliminate militants from the Swat Valley and some surrounding districts. "It will be a drawn-out affair," he warned, "because the militants in Swat have had time to entrench themselves in the area, mix with the people, and through coercion, fear and using terror as a weapon, eliminate all those who supported the government." He said militants were "making best use of the terrain, which is ideal country for any guerrilla warfare". The government is confident it has public support for its military campaign - but this could easily be eroded if civilian casualties mount.

10.05.2009. Pakistan urging residents to flee. Pakistan's government is lifting a curfew in the Swat valley to allow residents to escape an intense battle between the army and Taleban militants. The curfew has trapped tens of thousands of people attempting to flee the violence. The army is trying to reverse militant advances in the area, in what the prime minister has called a "fight for the survival of the country". The army said dozens of militants had been killed in fighting on Saturday. The government said the curfew would be lifted for seven hours on Sunday, beginning at 06.00 local time. It asked civilians to take the chance to flee the area. The lifting of the curfew is a sign that the army offensive is likely to intensify over the coming days. The military has said it intends to "eliminate" the Taleban fighters. The fighting has already displaced some 200,000 people, while a further 300,000 are estimated to be on the move or about to flee, the UN says. The government also said on Saturday that refugee camps would be set up in Peshawar, the capital of North West Frontier Province, and to the north-east in Naushara.

Footage on local television showed people at one camp desperately looting UN supplies including blankets and cooking oil. Earlier, fighting was reported to have reached the biggest town in the region, Mingora, which the army has been trying to recapture. One resident in the town told the Associated Press news agency he was too scared to flee, and was running out of food for his three children. "We have no electricity, no running water, and we are almost out of food, milk and other things," said the man, Ikramullah Khan. "We do not know what to do." The army said it had killed 55 more militants on Saturday, having said that more than 140 militants had died in earlier clashes. Due to the intensity of the fighting and the cutting of phone networks, it is difficult to get independent information on the fighting or verify the army's claims, correspondents say. Prime Minister Yusuf Raza Gilani told reporters on Saturday called the conflict "a guerrilla war". "This is our own war. This is war for the survival of the country," Reuters news agency quoted him as saying. Sunday's curfew is especially aimed at the residents of the towns of Kambar and Raheemabad. They have been blaming both sides for the violence as the military continues to bombard the area while the Taleban reportedly prevents people from fleeing. One Mingora resident was quoted by Reuters saying he had not been able to escape during an earlier curfew. "We are feeling so helpless, we want to go but can't," said Sallahudin Khan. "We tried to leave yesterday after authorities relaxed the curfew for a few hours, but we couldn't as the main road leading out of Mingora was literally jammed with the flood of fleeing people."

Flight from Swat as curfew lifted. Thousands of people have fled Pakistan's violence-hit Swat district after the army briefly lifted a curfew. Local residents trapped by fighting between troops and Taleban militants were given a few hours to leave. Between 50 and 60 militants were killed in Swat on Sunday and about 140 bodies had been found in neighbouring Shangla district, the military said in a statement. Clashes were also reported in the nearby districts of Dir and Buner. In Swat, explosive devices planted by the militants in roads and militant mortar fire were causing civilian casualties, the military said. As dawn broke in Mingora, thousands of civilians were setting out. The curfew has now been re-imposed. Analysts say the decision to lift it for most of the day is a sign that the army offensive is likely to intensify in the coming days.

13.05.2009. Pakistan's president says nuclear stockpile safe. Pakistan's president on Wednesday brushed aside warnings that country's nuclear arsenal was in jeopardy because of mounting instability caused by a surge in Taleban activity. Asif Ali Zardari reiterated that Pakistan's secret nuclear sites were secure, but declined to specify what safeguards are in place. "You can ask anybody who is responsible in any government and they will tell you they are not concerned. They are quite satisfied with the situation in Pakistan," Zardari said at a press conference. Pakistan mounted an offensive last week against Taleban militants in the northern Swat Valley near the Afghan border. Nearly 1 million people have been displaced in the fighting since supporters of the ousted regime in Afghanistan tried to push further into Pakistan - and closer to the country's capital of Islamabad.

15.05.2009. Pakistani forces killed 55 Taleban in the northwestern valley of Swat on Friday, the army said, and lifted a curfew to allow thousands of civilians to flee before troops assail the Taleban-held main town. 17.05.2009. A top government official said the offensive near Afghanistan had already killed more than 1,000 Taleban fighters, while a group of pro-government religious leaders endorsed the operation but condemned US missile strikes in the northwest. Interior Minister Rehman Malik said the operation in Swat and surrounding areas would "continue till the last Taleban are flushed out."

18.05.2009. UN: Pakistan fighting displaces many civilians. The U.N. refugee agency says fighting in Pakistan between the military and Taleban militants has displaced more than 1.45 million people since May 2. UNHCR spokesman Ron Redmond says that is in addition to the more than 550,000 people who were displaced earlier by the military offensive in northwest Pakistan, meaning the total is now more than 2 million. He said more people are being uprooted faster in Pakistan than in any other world conflict since the Rwandan genocide of the 1990s. Redmond said Monday that it "has been long time since there has been a displacement this big. It could go back to Rwanda. It's an enormous number of people."

21.05.2009. In Pakistan there has been a real change in the past few months, the public has had enough of the Taleban. A spokesperson of the people of Pakistan says: "They  [the Taleban] are not friends, they are not our allies, they're our enemies, they are criminals, they are gangsters." Such strong public criticism of the Taleban is new - the mood has changed in Pakistan. The people hate them and according to letters to the editors of all the major newspapers, the people of Swat are thanking the army for intervening in a decisive manner. They say "eliminate them, clear up our area", that is the message that is coming from the local people.

24.05.2009. Pakistan army fights for key city. Pakistan's army says it has recaptured several areas of Mingora, the main city in the Swat valley, as its offensive against the Taleban continues. A security official said soldiers were now clearing landmines in those sections back under government control. But clashes are still continuing with soldiers and militants engaged in hand-to-hand fighting at some of the city's main intersections, the army says.

27.05.2009. 27.05.2009. Pakistan's government has blamed Taleban fighters for a bomb attack in Lahore which killed at least 24 people and left hundreds more injured. Officials said the Taleban carried out the attack in revenge for a military offensive against them in Swat valley. The army is claiming sweeping victories against Taleban insurgents in the Swat valley, near the Afghan border - saying more than 1,000 militants have been killed in the past month. Terrorists had threatened revenge attacks in Pakistan's cities after the military stepped up its operations in the Swat valley. Anarchists and other internationals have condemned the attack and offered condolences to Pakistan. US ambassador Anne Patterson said the attacks "show the lengths extremist elements are willing to go to as they attempt to force their agenda on to a people who only wish to go about their daily lives in peace".

28.05.2009. Pakistan hit by wave of bombs. At least 10 people were killed and more than 120 injured in a series of bombings across Pakistan. In the bloodiest attack, a double explosion at a crowded market in Peshawar left up to eight people dead. A few hours later in the same city, a suicide bomber attacked a paramilitary checkpoint killing at least three soldiers. It comes a day after the Taleban said it was behind a suicide gun and bomb attack which claimed the lives of 24 people in the eastern city of Lahore. The Taleban's attacks seem to be more and more sophisticated. The Lahore bombing, it says, was in response to an army offensive in the Swat region and it has threatened more violence. The army moved against the Taleban stronghold late last month after a peace pact collapsed, sparking a humanitarian crisis as some two million of people fled the fighting.

30.05.2009. Pakistan secures key Swat Valley city. The Pakistani military says security forces have taken back the city of Mingora from the Taleban, calling it a significant victory in its offensive against the Taleban. Mingora is the largest city in Pakistan's Swat Valley where security forces have been fighting the Taleban in a month-long offensive. The fighting has uprooted about 2.4 million Pakistanis from their homes in the northwestern region of the country, according to the latest data from the United Nations. Of those displaced, about 10 percent -- or 240,000 -- are living in refugee camps, according to the U.N. The Taleban has threatened to continue attacking cities in Pakistan until the military ends its operations against Taleban militants in the country's northwest.

31.05.2009. Pakistan 'nearing Swat victory'. Pakistan's operation against Taleban rebels in the Swat valley region should be over in the next few days, the country's defense secretary has said. Syed Athar Ali told a meeting of Asian nations in Singapore that only "5% to 10% of the job" remains. But an army spokesman said it was not possible to predict when the military operation would be completed. The Red Cross and the Anarchist International said they were "gravely concerned" by the humanitarian situation in Swat.

01.06.2009. The Anarchist International: True Swat victory won't be military - we call for more international aid. Pakistan says it is close to beating the Taleban in the Swat Valley, but battlefield success alone does not equal victory: Militant commanders are still at large, local governments and police forces have been decimated and millions of residents are displaced from their homes. So far, no top commanders, including Swat Taleban chief Maulana Fazlullah, are known to have been killed or captured. Some parts of the valley remain under militant control. Even if Pakistan succeeds in eliminating insurgents in one of its most intense operations yet, the northwestern valley is just one of several militant strongholds and not even the most important. Already, fighting is flaring in the semiautonomous tribal areas bordering Afghanistan, where al-Qaeda and the Taleban are more entrenched than they were in Swat.

The AI sees Swat as a test of nuclear-armed Pakistan's ability and willingness to tackle insurgents in the northwest blamed for attacks on American and NATO forces in Afghanistan. Re-establishing municpal administration - most importantly bringing back police patrols - is critical to holding Swat once the army offensive ends. To do that well could take months, possibly years. For now, it appears the army and paramilitary forces will have to act as the police, as they were already trying to do in many parts of Swat before the offensive. The military insists it has tried to minimize civilian casualties and property damage in Swat's towns, knowing public support could wane otherwise. Still, video footage and reporters' accounts from various parts of the valley and nearby districts indicate significant destruction. For many of the 3 million refugees, a return could mean finding a crushed home or damaged businesses, fueling popular anger and hampering efforts to jump-start the local economy in a region that was once a jewel of Pakistani tourism.

Pakistan has announced $100 million in federal aid to help the Swat refugees while the U.N. is pleading with donors to come up with $543 million to ease what is one of the largest internal displacements in a country in many years. Ordinary Pakistanis also have launched drives to help the refugees, most of whom are staying with relatives or friends but some 200,000 of whom are in camps. There also are plans to beef up the police force in Swat, in part by using retired military officers. But timeframes are unclear, and the country's track record on post-conflict work is not inspiring.

Before the latest offensive in Swat, Pakistan waged a six-month fight against insurgents in Bajur, a tribal region considered a sanctuary for al-Qaeda and the Taleban on the Afghan border. Of up to 500,000 people displaced from Bajur, some 230,000 have returned since the army declared victory there in February, only to find as many as 6,000 homes and shops destroyed or damaged, said a top administrative official in the region, Shafir Ullah Jan. Jan said the government was fixing some buildings and roads in Bajur's main town of Khar, and that foreign aid was part of that, but he had yet to see a comprehensive plan for reconstruction for an area that is far more needy than Swat. Since the people of Khar are badly helped by the government, the people of Swat would probably also be badly helped because after the operation in Swat, the government may launch a new operation in some other area, and Swat would then be neglected the way Khar has been ignored.

With every new instance of violence in the tribal belt - where al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden is rumored to be hiding - the odds of another offensive appear greater. Swat may not be Pakistan's first attempt to dismantle the insurgency, but it can't be its last, either. The Anarchist International calls for more international aid to Khar, Swat, etc.

04.06.2009. US envoy visits Pakistani refugees, promises more aid. A top US envoy expressed sympathy Thursday to refugees displaced by Pakistan's military offensive against the Taleban and promised them more aid from Washington. Richard Holbrooke, President Barack Obama's special envoy to Pakistan and Afghanistan, visited two camps housing some of the about 3 million people who have fled the month-old campaign to oust the Taleban from the Swat Valley and surrounding regions. Holbrooke on Wednesday announced another $200 million in aid for the refugees, pending congressional approval, bringing US aid directed at the refugees to $310 million. "It's up to the Pakistan army to give you security - that is not our job," Holbrooke said. "We are giving assistance."

09.06.2009 Villagers are rising up against the Taleban in a remote corner of northern Pakistan, a grass-roots rebellion that underscores the shift in the public mood against the militants and a growing confidence to confront them. More than a thousand villagers from the district of Dir have been fighting Taleban militants since Friday, when a Taleban suicide bomber detonated his payload during prayer time at a mosque, killing at least 30 villagers.

10.06.2009. A suicide bomb attack on a luxury hotel in the Pakistani city of Peshawar killed at least 18 people. A spate of bombings has followed an army crackdown on Taleban militants. The latest attack came as the Pakistani army stepped up its operations in the north-west with an offensive in the Bannu district bordering semi-autonomous North Waziristan. Artillery and helicopter gunships have pounded positions held by the Janikhel tribe, which is accused of aiding the Taleban. The Anarchist International strongly condemns the suicide bomb attack.

15.06.2009. Pakistan's army chief has said the head of the Taleban in Pakistan "must be eliminated". General Ashfaq Kayani said Baitullah Mehsud, who has his stronghold in the tribal district of South Waziristan, was "not fighting for Islam". His comments come as a provincial governor said an offensive to target militants was imminent. Baitullah Mehsud's group is blamed for a string of deadly attacks in Pakistan. Last week a prominent Muslim cleric who was outspoken in his opposition to the Taleban was killed in a suicide blast at his seminary in Lahore. Gen Kayani said that militants targeted children, the elderly and clerics - and as such they were Pakistan's enemies. "We are conducting this operation to bring misguided people back on the right path," he said. "They are not fighting for Islam. Pakistan was created in the name of Islam and we know how to protect it," he added.

17.06.2009. Pakistan to invite Taleban's victims to fight back. Civilians who lived under the Taleban's harsh rule in Pakistan's Swat Valley may soon be recruited to police the region - with preference going to those hit hardest during the militants' two-year campaign of terror, a top official says. To fight an insurgency, "the people have to be actively with you," Malik Naveed Khan, inspector general of police for the North West Frontier Province has said.

25.06.2009. Pakistan urges US to end drone attacks. Islamabad called for an end to US missile attacks on its soil, two days after a suspected drone strike killed 80 people in the country's northwest. Pakistan has loudly disapproved of the drone attacks because they involve the use of force by a foreign government on its soil and sometimes kill innocents and are highly unpopular among the Pakistani public.With the operation in Swat winding down, Pakistan's military is gearing up for a new campaign in South Waziristan, where heavily armed tribesmen hold sway and al-Qaeda and Taleban leaders are believed to be hiding.

19.08.2009. Pakistani Taleban's deputy head takes over group. The deputy head of the Pakistani Taleban, Maulvi Faqir Mohammad, announced that he is temporarily assuming leadership of the militant group because its chief is ill, although Washington and Islamabad have said he almost certainly was killed by a recent missile strike. He stressed his appointment was only temporary, and said the final decision on who would replace the chief Baitullah Mehsud would rest with a 42-member Taleban council, known as a shura. The announcement Wednesday by Maulvi Faqir Mohammad was another sign that Taleban commanders are jockeying for power after the reported death of Baitullah Mehsud in an Aug. 5 CIA missile strike in northwestern Pakistan's tribal belt.

21.08.2009. Pakistan Taleban name new chief. Pakistan's Taleban movement has named a new leader, its deputy head Maulvi Faqir Mohammed has said. He said Hakimullah Mehsud, a close associate of ex-leader Baitullah Mehsud, had been unanimously appointed at a meeting in northern Pakistan. The Taleban Council held its meeting in the Orakzai tribal area. Hakimullah Mehsud, who is in his late 20s, is a military chief of the Tehrik-e-Taleban Pakistan (TTP) organization formed by Beitullah Mehsud in an effort to unite the various factions under one umbrella. He controls an estimated 2,000 fighters in the Orakzai, Kurram and Khyber regions.

25.08.2009. After weeks of denials, two Pakistani Taleban commanders acknowledged Tuesday that the group's top leader, Baitullah Mehsud, was dead - claiming he died 18 days after a US missile strike and disputing reports that the al-Qaeda linked movement he left behind was falling apart. Mehsud's death is a victory for the US and Pakistan. Pakistan considered him its No. 1 internal threat because of the numerous attacks he staged on its soil, while the Americans saw him as an unacceptable danger to the stability of a nuclear-armed ally and to the war effort in neighboring Afghanistan. Waliur Rehman and Hakimullah Mehsud confirmed an earlier Taleban announcement that the latter was the new Pakistani Taleban chief. Hakimullah Mehsud, 28, is considered a hotheaded, ruthless militant who might have problems keeping the Taleban unified, but Tuesday's call signals he's solidly in charge for now.

27.08.2009. A suicide bomber attacked the main border crossing for convoys ferrying supplies to US and NATO troops in Afghanistan on Thursday, killing at least 19 security officers, officials said. The strike will raise fears the Pakistani Taleban is regrouping and making good on its word to carry out revenge attacks following the slaying of its leader, Baitullah Mehsud, in a CIA missile strike earlier this month. Also in the border region, two US missiles hit a suspected militant compound, killing six people, the latest in a string of such attacks, intelligence officials said. The United States has launched more than 40 missile strikes from unmanned planes on al-Qaeda and Taleban targets close to the Afghan border since last year, reportedly killing several top commanders, but also civilians. It does not comment on the attacks. The missiles are fired from CIA-operated drones believed to be launched from Afghanistan or from secret bases inside Pakistan. They are reported to be piloted by operatives inside the United States. The Pakistani government publicly protests the attacks, though is assumed to be cooperating with the strikes and providing intelligence for them. It has called on Washington to give the technology for such attacks to Islamabad because its military is capable of using the drones.

03.09.2009. Attack on minister puts focus on Pakistan security. Authorities are holding six suspects in connection with an attack that wounded Pakistan's religious affairs minister and killed his driver, officials said Thursday. Members of his inner circle were among those being questioned. The attack has raised concern about security in the capital and the ability of Pakistani police to protect top officials. No group has taken responsibility for Wednesday's gun assault on Hamid Saeed Kazmi, but the minister is a vocal Taleban critic and the Islamist militants are suspected. Authorities have been on alert for revenge attacks following the Aug. 5 killing of Pakistani Taleban chief Baitullah Mehsud in a CIA missile strike. Interior Minister Rehman Malik said Pakistan's government is trying to get more bulletproof vehicles to transport top officials.

05.09.2009. Pakistani troops killed 43 alleged militants in an operation in the Khyber tribal region while airstrikes left several more dead Saturday in the stronghold of the new Taleban chief elsewhere in the northwest, officials said.

18.09.2009. Suicide bomber kills 29 in northwest Pakistan. Scores of bloodied and bandaged victims filled hospital beds after a suicide car bomber destroyed a two-story hotel Friday in northwest Pakistan, killing 29 people and underscoring the relentless security threat to the region. The blast on the outskirts of Kohat town wounded 55 others. It was the second attack in two days in the area, which is close to Pakistan's rugged border region with Afghanistan where al-Qaeda and Taleban militants hold sway. The attack took place in the Shiite-dominated village of Usterzai, raising speculation that it may have been a sectarian assault by Sunni extremists. It occurred just days before Muslims from both sects celebrate the end of the fasting month of Ramadan. Islamist militants have also staged bombings in public places in the northwest to warn locals from cooperating with security forces, or punish them for already doing so. The Hikmat Ali Hotel - owned by a Shiite - was among several buildings destroyed or badly damaged, police official Asmat Ullah said. At least eight cars were mangled by the force of the blast, witnesses said. Sunni extremist groups such as the Taleban and al-Qaeda believe Shiites are infidels, and their influence in Pakistan in recent years has fueled sectarian attacks that have long plagued Pakistan.

20.09.2009. Captured Pakistan Taleban commander dies in jail. A feared Taleban commander known for beheading opponents died in custody Sunday from wounds sustained during a fierce firefight with Pakistani security forces last week, the military said.Sher Muhammad Qasab died after being critically wounded in the gunbattle in Swat Valley, the army's media center said in a statement. Qasab's three sons were killed when he was captured. Qasab is an Urdu-language word meaning "butcher." He was given the title because of his ruthlessness toward enemies. The arrest of Qasab - who had a $121,000 bounty on his head - was the third from the army's list of 10 most-wanted Swat militants. Qasab allegedly decapitated many Pakistani troops in Swat when the Taleban was in control. The Pakistan Taleban has been on the run since being cleared from the scenic valley, once a tourist hotspot, and surrounding areas in July after the military launched a major offensive to retake the region in April.

The military announced Sunday that security forces killed eight militants in search operations throughout Swat since Saturday. Twenty-three insurgents were also apprehended and another 22 surrendered, it said in a statement. One of the militants killed was a Taleban commander identified as Chamtu Khan, it said. A Pakistani patrol also killed 10 Taleban attempting to infiltrate Swat Valley's main city of Mingora on Thursday. The army offensive against Taleban fighters in Swat has killed more than 1,800 alleged militants, according to the military. It says 330 Pakistani troops also died in operations in the valley.

24.09.2009. Pakistan unlikely to cooperate fully with US. Pakistan's doubts about US commitment to the Afghan war make it less likely to cooperate in targeting Taleban commanders said to be directing the insurgency across the border. Pakistan has been ambivalent about the militants, sometimes trying to enlist them as potential allies in case they take control again in neighboring Afghanistan - a prospect many here believe is getting closer. The top US commander recently warned that NATO could lose the war. Searching for alternatives to sending still more troops, the White House is now considering a strategy championed by Vice President Joe Biden that focuses on stepped-up missile attacks by unmanned US drones against al-Qaeda and Taleban targets on the Pakistani side of the border. To be effective, such attacks require Pakistani intelligence. The Pakistanis are believed to have withheld intelligence for years about key suspects in the Afghan Taleban, but the US has been making progress in recent months securing their cooperation against certain targets. Although many of these militants were primarily trying to overthrow the Pakistani government, some also had close ties with fighters in Afghanistan. More than 70 such attacks have killed scores of ranking militant commanders since last year, including Baitullah Mehsud, the leader of the Pakistani Taleban. On Thursday, a missile strike near the town of Mir Ali in North Waziristan killed four people, Pakistani officials said. The Pakistani government routinely issues statements of protest, even though these strikes are widely believed to take place with its support. US and NATO officials have long believed that much of the direction, manpower, money and weapons fueling the Afghan insurgency comes from across the border in Pakistan - particularly Afghan Taleban leader Mullah Omar, who is thought to be based close to the city of Quetta in Baluchistan province, and the network commanded by Siraj Haqqani in the Waziristan tribal areas.

American officials and many analysts allege that Pakistan's powerful spy agency is either protecting, tolerating or actively supporting those groups because they do not pose a direct threat to the Pakistani state and may be useful allies in ensuring that a pro-Pakistan, anti-India regime takes power in Afghanistan when the Americans leave. Pakistan has fought three wars against India and still considers it the country's main threat. India has tried to forge close ties with Kabul and has established consulates in several Afghan cities. Pakistan does not want to see a pro-New Delhi regime on its western flank if the Americans withdraw. While nominally a parliamentary democracy, Pakistan's army generals and intelligence chiefs in practice still control defense policy and to some extent foreign policy. With talk of NATO pulling out of Afghanistan, an increasingly potent Taleban threat and rising questions in the US about whether defeating the insurgency is possible, there is even less incentive for the Pakistani authorities to share intelligence on Haqqani and Omar. 

The Pakistanis have probably not supplied the US with much intelligence on the Haqqani network. In return, Haqqani and other Afghan Taleban have not joined their Pakistani Taleban brethren in trying to seize other regions and advance on the capital, Islamabad. "They don't want to antagonize several groups in Pakistan. If the Haqqani group starts helping the Pakistani Taleban, then God help us," said Talat Masood, a Pakistani defense analyst. "The Americans cannot stay in Afghanistan forever, but we will have to live here forever." The US ambassador to Pakistan, Anne Patterson, said in a recent interview with McClatchy Newspapers that Pakistan had "different priorities" than America in this regard and was "reluctant to take action" against the leadership of the Afghan insurgency. A senior Pakistani intelligence official, however, insisted the spy agencies of Pakistan were sharing intelligence with the CIA about militants operating both here and in Afghanistan, including the Haqqani network. "The CIA knows about our role, but we don't want to highlight it through the media," said the officer, speaking on condition of anonymity in line with the requirements of his job.

In the past, Pakistani officials have pointed to the several al-Qaeda commanders the country has handed over to the United States and ongoing military campaigns against insurgents that cost many Pakistani lives. Pakistan has claimed several successes in the fight against the Pakistani Taleban in recent months, including a widely praised offensive against insurgents in the Swat Valley. But at the very least, the army and the intelligence agencies give priority to battling groups fighting the Pakistani state rather than those who direct their energies toward USand NATO troops in Afghanistan. There is little government or military control in Pakistan's remote, mountainous border region. Al-Qaeda's top leaders, including Osama bin Laden, may be hiding in the area, and militants move freely across the border. USmissiles are believed to be fired from unmanned drones launched from Afghanistan or from a base inside the Pakistani province of Baluchistan. American officials generally do not acknowledge the attacks. The strikes are unpopular among nationalist and Muslim politicians and activists, but they have become so routine that they attract little media attention or public protest in Pakistan these days. Still, an increase in attacks - or strikes outside the semiautonomous areas where they have so far taken place - could turn the public against Pakistan's government at a time when its popularity is already low. Critics would surely paint Pakistani leader Asif Ali Zardari, who met with Obama in New York on Thursday, as an American lackey.

26.09.2009. Suicide bombs kill 16, wound about 150. Two suicide attacks killed 16 people and wounded more than 150 in northwest Pakistan on Saturday, showing Taleban militants are still able to strike despite heightened military operations and the slaying of their leader last month. A third bomb exploded in the northern town of Gilgit, wounding four people, Pakistan's SAMA news channel quoted local police Chief Ali Sher as saying. He described it as a "low-intensity bomb" but provided no further details. North West Frontier Province's information minister, Mian Iftikhar Hussain, said the attacks would not deter the government from fighting militants. He said security forces had arrested 40 would-be suicide bombers in recent months in the northwest, thwarting efforts by the Taleban to create chaos. "It is not only our duty ... to fight this menace of terrorism, it is a responsibility of the whole world," Hussain told reporters in Peshawar. "We are on the front line today, that's why our blood is being shed." The Anarchist International condemns the suicide bombings.

30.09.2009. US-Congress approves tripling aid to Pakistan. Legislation to triple aid to Pakistan and stem the tide of radicalism and anti-Americanism in that Asian nation cleared Congress on Wednesday and moved to President Barack Obama for his signature. The bill, approved by a voice vote in the House, would provide Pakistan with $1.5 billion in aid a year over the next five years focused on democratic, economic and social development programs. The aid would seek to strengthen Pakistan's legislative and judicial systems; its public education system, emphasizing access for women and girls; its health care system; and its human rights practices with particular attention to women as well as ethnic and religious minorities. The legislation also authorizes "such sums as are necessary" for military assistance to Pakistan, while conditioning that aid or arms transfers on several conditions.

Those include certification that Pakistan is cooperating in stopping the proliferation of nuclear weapons, that Pakistan is making a sustained commitment to combating terrorist groups and that Pakistan security forces are not subverting the country's political or judicial processes. "The United States is firmly committed to the future that the Pakistani people deserve, a future that will advance our common security and prosperity," Obama said in a statement. Richard Holbrooke, the U.S. special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan, said that the congressional action, along with an upcoming trip to Pakistan by Clinton, could help turn around pervasive anti-American sentiments in the country. "We recognize that Pakistani public opinion on the United States is surprisingly low given the tremendous effort the United States is making to lead in the international coalition in support of Pakistan," he said in New York.

11.10.2009. Bloody siege at Pakistan army HQ ends with more than 20 dead. Pakistani commandos freed dozens of hostages held by militants at the army's own headquarters Sunday, ending a bloody, 22-hour drama that embarrassed the nation's military as it plans a new offensive against al-Qaeda and the Taleban. The standoff killed more than 20 people, including three captives and nine militants, who wore army fatigues in the audacious assault. The rescue operation began before dawn Sunday, ultimately freeing 42 hostages, the military said. One attacker, described as the militants' ringleader, was captured. Five heavily armed terrorists took the hostages after they and about four other assailants attacked the headquarters' main gate Saturday, killing six soldiers, including a brigadier and a lieutenant colonel. The gunmen arrived in a white van that reportedly had army license plates. It was the third major attack in Pakistan in a week and threatens to deflate the army's growing popularity in the wake of successful operations against the Taleban in the Swat Valley, Buner and Bajur. The government said the siege only steeled its resolve to go through with an offensive in South Waziristan, a tribal region along the Afghan border and a major militant stronghold. The military was not deterred, it launched two airstrikes on suspected militant targets in South Waziristan on Sunday evening, ending a five day lull in attacks there and killing at least five militants.

12.10.2009. A suicide bomber killed 41 people in an attack on a Pakistani military convoy passing through a market on Monday as the Taleban claimed responsibility for the weekend raid on the army's headquarters.

15.10.2009. Teams of gunmen attack three security facilities in the eastern city of Lahore, leaving at 27 people dead including several militants, while a suicide car bombing at a police station kills 11 people in northwestern Kohat district and another bomb kills a 6-year-old boy in Peshawar in the northwest.

President Barack Obama on Thursday signed into law a $7.5 billion aid package for Pakistan that the U.S.-ally's military criticized as American meddling in its internal affairs. The measure provides $1.5 billion annually over five years for economic and social programs and comes as Pakistan faces a string of violent militant attacks and bombings as its military orchestrates an offensive into the Taleban heartland. The law is the Obama administration's attempt to strengthen the weak civilian government in Islamabad and encourage its fight against Taleban and al-Qaeda militants operating along the border with Afghanistan, where the United States is fighting an eight-year war.

16.10.2009. Bomb attacks. Three suicide attackers, including a woman, attacked a police station in northwestern Pakistan, killing 13 people Friday while army airstrikes killed a dozen suspected militants in a Taleban stronghold ahead of an expected ground offensive. The bombing in Peshawar city was the latest in a surge of terrorist attacks over the last 11 days that has killed more than 150 people and underscored the power of the Taleban, who have warned the army against launching any operation in the militants' base close to the Afghan border. In Islamabad, the army chief met with the prime minister and other political leaders for talks that included plans for an offensive in South Waziristan. After the meeting, Information Minister Qamar Zaman Kaira vowed the country's leaders would "take all steps to eradicate terrorism and extremism from the country."

Chaotic-authoritarian Pakistan, rocked by bombings, sets its sights on even more authoritarian militants' sanctuary along the Afghan border. The Pakistani military is setting its sights on the Taleban's remote sanctuary after nearly two weeks of big bombings across the country, as hundreds flee the Afghan border region each day before what promises to be the army's riskiest offensive yet. With the first snows of winter less than two months away, the army has limited time to mount a major ground attack. The U.S. is racing to send in night vision goggles and other equipment. The Pakistani military insists it's sealing off supply and escape routes, forcing the militants to rely on goat paths. The army has tried three times since 2001 to dislodge Taleban fighters from their stronghold in South Waziristan, part of the lawless tribal area along the border. All three previous attempts ended in negotiated truces that left the Taleban in control.

This time, however, military spokesman Gen. Athar Abbas said there will be no negotiations for fear any deals would be seen as a failure and could jeopardize gains won last spring when Pakistani soldiers wrested control of the Swat Valley, elsewhere in the northwest. "If we fail, everything is rolled back," Abbas said. Failure would also deal a humiliating blow to government security forces. As mentioned, a series of assaults against government installations, including the army's general headquarters, has shown the Taleban along the mountainous border and their allies in the heart of the country are bolstering an alliance capable of challenging the Pakistani state. The U.S. says the results of the South Waziristan campaign will also help determine the success of the faltering American war effort in Afghanistan. Militants use the Waziristan region as a base from which to launch attacks across the border - and beyond. "This region is at the heart of the struggle against al-Qaeda, the Taleban, and other global jihadi movements. It is a lawless sanctuary for extremists and would-be militants of every shape, size, and color," said Evan Kohlmann, whose U.S.-based NEFA Foundation follows terrorist groups.

"It is perhaps the only place on earth where a mujahedeen commander from Uzbekistan can plausibly establish a hardened base of operations, staffed primarily by like-minded fighters of Turkish, Chinese, Danish, and German extraction," Kohlmann said. "Most of the jihad training camps frequented by foreign nationals and featured in al-Qaeda and Taleban terror propaganda videos are located in either North or South Waziristan." Foreigners require special permission to enter tribal areas. Many Pakistani journalists from other parts of the country are at risk in areas controlled by militants.

Abbas said the assault will be limited to slain Taleban leader Baitullah Mehsud's holdings - a swath of territory that stretches roughly 3,310 kilometers (1,275 square miles). That portion covers about half of South Waziristan, which itself is slightly larger than Delaware. The plan is to capture and hold the area where Abbas estimates 10,000 insurgents are headquartered and reinforced with about 1,500 foreign fighters, most of them of Central Asian origin. "There are Arabs, but the Arabs are basically in the leadership, providing resources and expertise and in the role of trainers," he said in an interview from the heavily fortified garrison town of Rawalpindi, where last weekend insurgents mounted an assault against army headquarters.

The army is preparing for the array of guerrilla tactics the Taleban are likely to employ, including ambushes, suicide attacks and improvised explosive devises. "We are shaping the environment, isolating the target. We are blocking all entry and exit points, denying them availability of provisions, fuel and ammunition, forcing them to rely on goat tracks to resupply," Abbas said. Despite sometimes rocky relations with the Pakistani military, the U.S. is trying to rush in equipment that would help with mobility, night fighting and precision bombing, a U.S. Embassy official said. "If we could deliver things tomorrow, it would be here," said the official. In addition to night vision devices, the Pakistan military has said it is seeking additional Cobra helicopter gunships, heliborne lift capability, laser-guided munitions and intelligence equipment to monitor cell and satellite telephones.

While Abbas was evasive about the timing of the offensive, he said that it will begin with a ground assault against insurgent positions before winter snows block mountain roads. "We have to come in before the snow," Abbas said. "It will start in the form of a conventional operation to push them out and regain space." Once the offensive has started, a harsh winter and heavy snows can work to the army's advantage by driving fighters out of their unheated mountain hideouts, he said. In no mood to wait, truckloads of families are fleeing their homes. Amnesty International said Friday that its research teams in the area report 90,000 to 150,000 residents have fled South Waziristan since July, when the military began a long-range artillery and aerial bombardment in the region. The group faulted the government for failing to prepare adequate refugee camps.

Although the military has been hitting targets in South Waziristan for the past three months, it waited until two weeks ago to say it would definitely go ahead with a major ground offensive into the region. What followed was a rash of major bombings that killed 175 people and demonstrated the militants' ability to attack cities across the county. In cities rattled by the recent bombings, residents condemn insurgents while bemoaning what they see as a weak government unable to end the terror. "Our inherent weaknesses, corruption, and inability to govern the country are now exposed fully. It's total chaos all over the country," said Saima Ahmed, a 33-year-old bank employee in the southern city of Karachi. "The government should ... come down heavily on the terrorists for once and for all."

17.10.2009. Pakistan army starts South Waziristan ground assault. Pakistani forces launched a ground offensive against Taleban militants in South Waziristan on the Afghan border on Saturday, with soldiers advancing from three directions, officials said. "The operation has started," said military spokesman Major General Athar Abbas said. He declined to give details or say how long he expected the offensive would take. Intelligence and government officials said troops were moving from three directions and some clashes had erupted. The militants were firing rocket-propelled grenades, machine guns and anti-aircraft guns while government forces were using artillery, mortars and aircraft, intelligence officials said. The army says about 28,000 soldiers are taking on an estimated 10,000 hard-core Taleban, including about 1,000 tough Uzbek fighters and some Arab al-Qaeda members.

18.10.2009. Displaced people caught in the Pakistan conflict. There is a human face to the Pakistan forces offensive against Taleban militants which was launched on Saturday. Internally displaced people are now on the move from the country's South Waziristan region in search of safety. The United Nations has pledged help to those who are leaving. It is a perilous journey hampered by closed roads and military action. "The situation is very bad. Our family and children are in trouble. We were facing bombardment, mortar fire, in the area. All the main roads are closed and the people are coming out from the mountain roads instead," said Shuger Jan Mehsood one of those on the move. South Wazaristan is a nerve centre for Pakistani insurgents fighting the US backed government and a major base for foreign militants planning attacks in Afghansitan. The army say it has surrounded the militants and claim their offensive – speaheaded from three different directions and backed by aircraft and aritllery – has claimed the lives of 60 militants with five soldiers being killed in the first 24 hours. The ground offensive with about 28,000 troops deployed has sparked protests. About 2,000 demonstrators gathered in Lahore to wave banners and to chant anti-American slogans with calls for the US and Nato forces to quit Pakistan and Afghanistan.

19.10.2009. Troops fought militants on three fronts and fighter jets bombed insurgent positions near the Afghan border Monday as Pakistan pressed ahead with an assault on the country's main Taleban and al-Qaeda stronghold. The army and the Pakistani Taleban have each claimed early victories in South Waziristan, a lawless, semiautonomous region that Islamist extremists use as a base to plot attacks on the Pakistani state, Western troops in Afghanistan and targets in the West. As the offensive entered its third day, Pakistani intelligence officials revealed that the army had reached prior agreements with two militant commanders, Maulvi Nazir and Hafiz Gul Bahadur - whose supporters are believed to be fighting U.S. forces in Afghanistan - to stay neutral during the assault. That could trigger concern in Washington, which has been pushing Islamabad to launch the offensive, seen as the most crucial yet against militants who are in control of a large swath of Pakistan's northwestern frontier region. As many as 150,000 civilians have left the region in recent months after the army made clear it was planning an assault, but some 350,000 people may be left. Authorities say up to 200,000 people may flee in the coming weeks.

21.10.2009. Pakistan hits Taleban as schools ordered shut. Pakistani helicopter gunships attacked Taleban bases near the Afghan border on Wednesday as authorities ordered educational institutions closed amid fears of retaliatory militant strikes. Qari Hussain Mehsud, a Taleban commander known as "the mentor of suicide bombers", called the BBC to take responsibility for an attack Tuesday on the International Islamic University in the capital and said all of Pakistan was a war zone.

26.10.2009. Pakistan kills 19 militants in border offensive.The army moved into South Waziristan nine days ago vowing to crush the Pakistani Taleban, a militant network it says is behind 80 percent of the suicide bombings in Pakistan. The militants have responded with an onslaught of terror attacks on targets around the country. Many schools in Pakistan reopened Monday after being shuttered for a week following warnings of insurgent strikes and a double suicide bombing at a university in the capital on Tuesday. An army statement said soldiers were progressing on three fronts in South Waziristan, but were meeting resistance on all of them. It said over the last 24 hours, 19 militants and six soldiers had been killed. Militant attacks in Pakistan have surged this month, killing more than 200 people, as the Taleban have tried to avert the army offensive in South Waziristan. The military announced Saturday it had captured the hometown of Pakistani Taleban chief Hakimullah Mehsud - its first major achievement in the offensive. The army has deployed some 30,000 troops to South Waziristan to take on an estimated 12,000 militants, including up to 1,500 foreign fighters, among them Uzbeks and Arabs. The U.N. says some 155,000 civilians have fled.

02.11.2009 Major terrorist attacks in Pakistan in the past month. A look at major militant attacks in Pakistan in the past month:

- Nov. 2: A suicide bomb killed 35 people near Pakistan's military headquarters Monday while a second blast wounded several police.

- Oct. 28: Car bomb explodes in a crowded market in main northwest city of Peshawar, killing at least 112 people.

- Oct. 23: Suicide bomber kills seven people close to a major air force complex in northwestern Pakistan.

- Oct. 20: Two suicide bombers attack the International Islamic University in Islamabad, killing six people.

- Oct. 16: Three suicide attackers hit a police station in Peshawar, killing 13.

- Oct. 15: Teams of gunmen attack three security facilities in the eastern city of Lahore, leaving at least 28 people dead, including the nine militants, while car bombs kill 11 people in northwestern Kohat district and a 6-year-old boy in Peshawar.

- Oct. 12: Suicide car bomb explodes near a market in the northwestern Shangla district, killing 41, including six security officers.

- Oct. 10: Raid on the army headquarters in Rawalpindi leads to a 22-hour standoff that leaves nine militants and 14 others dead.

- Oct. 9: Suicide car bomb in busy market area in Peshawar kills 53 people.

- Oct. 5: Bomber dressed as a security official kills five staff members at the U.N. food agency's headquarters in Islamabad.

Pakistan's president and other top officials condemned the blasts 02.11, but vowed to press on with the South Waziristan offensive. Taleban militants have de facto control in many of the semiautonomous tribal areas. On Monday the army had captured the Taleban town of Kaniguram and killed 12 militants in the past 24 hours.

14.11.2009. More suicide attacks. A suicide car bomber attacked a police checkpoint in northwest Pakistan on Saturday, killing 11 people, including four children, the latest in a wave of militant attacks that have claimed more than 300 lives in the past month. The attack on the outskirts of Peshawar solidifies the city's ominous status as a primary target for terrorists trying to force the military to end the offensive against them  launched last month in the border region of South Waziristan, where al-Qaeda and Taleban leaders are believed to be hiding. Strikes in the past week alone have killed more than 50 people in the city, including 10 at the regional office of Pakistan's top intelligence agency, which was targeted by a massive truck bombing Friday. The agency, the Inter Services Intelligence, has been overseeing much of the country's anti-terror campaign.

On Saturday, a Taleban commander claimed responsibility for that attack and another targeting a police station the same day in neighboring Bannu district. He vowed the violence would continue. "The suicide bombers were trained by me and I have a lot more volunteers to carry out more attacks," Qari Hussain Mehsud told an Associated Press reporter by telephone. The reporter had met the commander in the past and recognized his voice. Taleban and al-Qaeda fighters are waging a war against the Pakistani government because they deem it un-Islamic and are angry about its alliance with the United States. The insurgency began in earnest in 2007, and attacks have spiked since preparations for the offensive in South Waziristan began. The military says it has killed more than 520 militants in the offensive in South Waziristan, including seven on Saturday. The army's reports are nearly impossible to independently verify because access the region is restricted.

15.11.2009. Militants attack 2 anti-Taleban figures. Militants staged a pair of attacks against anti-Taleban figures in northwestern Pakistan on Sunday, killing one of the men as part of an escalating campaign to weaken the country's resolve to fight Islamic extremism. The government has supplemented its military campaigns by helping tribal leaders and local government officials set up militias to battle the Taleban. The militias, known as lashkars, have been compared to Iraq's Awakening Councils, which helped U.S. forces turn the tide against al-Qaeda there. As in Iraq, militants in Pakistan have targeted the leaders of such groups.

19.11.2009. A look at major attacks in Pakistan since the beginning of November:

- Nov. 19: A suicide bomber kills 19 people outside a courthouse in the main northwestern city of Peshawar.

- Nov. 16: A suicide truck bomber attacks a police station in northwestern Pakistan, killing six people.

- Nov. 14: A suicide car bomber attacks a police checkpoint in northwestern Pakistan, killing 11 people.

- Nov. 13: Suicide car bomber strikes regional headquarters of the main spy agency in Peshawar, killing 10 people. Second suicide bomber attacks police station in northwestern Bannu district, killing six people.

- Nov. 12: Gunmen kill a Pakistani working at the Iranian Consulate in Peshawar.

- Nov. 10: Suicide car bomber attacks crowded market in northwestern Pakistan, killing 26 people.

- Nov. 8: Suicide bomber hits crowded market in northwestern Pakistan, killing 12 people, including a mayor who once supported but had turned against the Taleban.

- Nov. 2: Suicide bomber kills 35 people outside bank near Pakistan's military headquarters in Rawalpindi.

13.12.2009. Troops moved into two areas in Kurram on Saturday - Fighting in Pakistan kills 7 militants, 2 troops. Pakistani soldiers battled militants in a tribal region close to the Afghan border Sunday, killing seven insurgents but losing two of their own in skirmishes in an area where al-Qaeda and the Taleban have long sought sanctuary, officials said. The fighting overnight in the Kurram tribal region comes amid an offensive by 30,000 Pakistani troops in nearby South Waziristan. Troops moved into two areas in Kurram on Saturday and engaged in fierce battles that killed 15 Taleban militants and three soldiers. Seven militants and two troops died as fighting raged overnight. People began fleeing the area Sunday after security forces urged villagers to leave. The U.S. has long pushed Pakistan to retake spots along the border with Afghanistan that have become safe havens for militants. That pressure is likely to intensify now that 30,000 additional U.S. troops are heading to Afghanistan to take on a resurgent Afghan Taleban. The army launched a ground offensive in South Waziristan in mid-October. The operation prompted a slew of retaliatory militant attacks nationwide that have killed more than 500 people.

21.12.2009. Pakistan's government reaches out to opposition. Pakistan's embattled government reached out to the opposition Monday as it sought to limit the damage from a recent Supreme Court decision striking down an amnesty protecting several of its senior officials from corruption charges. The court verdict has plunged Pakistan into political turmoil, distracting the government at a time when the U.S. is calling on the country to target Taleban and al-Qaeda militants launching cross-border attacks against coalition troops in Afghanistan. Some opposition members have called for officials who benefited from the amnesty, including President Asif Ali Zardari, to resign. But the Pakistan Muslim League-N's senior leadership has refrained from taking such a tough stance, a move that analysts say is driven by their desire to avoid destabilizing the country's fragile economic-political system.

22.12.2009. Suicide bombing kills 3 at NW Pakistan press club. A suicide bomber struck Tuesday outside a press club in the northwestern city of Peshawar, killing three people and wounding 17 in an attack that underscored the danger to journalists trying to cover Pakistan's Taleban-led insurgency. Militants have threatened, attacked and killed journalists in an attempt to prevent reporting they deem critical of the Taleban, and journalists also say they face pressure from government operatives trying to influence news coverage. The combination has made Pakistan one of the most dangerous environments to work, rivaling conflict zones like Iraq and Somalia, according to media watchdogs. Tuesday's attack, one of the most serious yet against journalists in the country, drove that point home. Anarchists and the Paris-based Reporters Without Borders condemned the attack. RWB said "threats against the Pakistani media and press clubs are nothing new but it is outrageous that this press freedom sanctuary should be targeted in this fashion." At least 45 journalists have been killed in Pakistan since 2001, the year Pakistan joined the U.S. in its fight against the Taleban and al-Qaeda, said Mazhar Abbas, until recently secretary general of the Pakistan Federal Union of Journalists. Before that, journalist killings were rare in Pakistan.

24.12.2009. A look at major terrorist attacks in Pakistan since medio November:

- Dec. 24: Suicide bomber kills four near government buildings in the main northwest city of Peshawar.

- Dec. 22: Suicide bomber kills three at the Peshawar Press Club.

- Dec. 15: Suicide car bomber kills 33 near a lawmaker's home in the Punjab province town of Dera Ghazi Khan.

- Dec. 7: Two bombs kill 34 at a market in eastern city of Lahore, while a suicide bomber kills 10 people outside a Peshawar court.

- Dec. 4: Gunmen and a suicide bomber attack a mosque in a military installation in Rawalpindi, killing 35.

- Dec. 2: Suicide bomber kills 2 outside Pakistani navy headquarters in Islamabad.

- Nov. 19: Suicide bomber kills 19 outside judicial complex in Peshawar.

01.01.2010. Major militant attacks in Pakistan since 24.12.2009. Pakistan's army is waging an offensive against militants in South Waziristan. The operation has provoked apparent reprisals that have killed more than 500 people since October. A look at some of the major attacks:

- Jan. 1, 2010: Suicide car bomber kills at least 75 at volleyball tournament in northwest town of Lakki Marwat.

- Dec. 28, 2009: Bomb blast kills at least 44 at a Shiite procession in southern city of Karachi.

10.01.2010. Wave of political killings hits southern Pakistan. Dozens of people have been killed in Pakistan's largest city including four found Sunday - three of them headless - in a wave of targeted attacks among rival political groups that some say is aimed at destabilizing the country's ruling coalition. Political violence is common in Karachi, but the shootings and decapitations since Jan. 1 have terrorized parts of this teeming southern metropolis, prompting the government to send in paramilitary forces to restore order. The political infighting comes at a time when the government is facing a raging Taleban-led insurgency that has spread to Karachi and killed more than 600 people across the country in the past three months. The growing unrest in the financial capital threatens to spark further instability.

21.01.2010. The Pakistani army said Thursday it cannot expand its offensive against militants for at least six months, and the United States backed off public pressure on an ally considered vital in the war next door in Afghanistan.

22.01.2010. Pakistan army kills militants in North Waziristan. Pakistani security forces killed three militants in North Waziristan on Friday, their first reported foray for months in a region where America is calling for action against al-Qaeda and the Taleban, intelligence officials said. North Waziristan is home to hundreds of fighters that U.S. officials say are fueling much of the insurgency in neighboring Afghanistan. They say Pakistani military action to clear the area is essential if the American-led war in Afghanistan is to succeed. The army said in a statement three militants were killed and two wounded in a search-and-clearance operation close to Miran Shah, the major town in North Waziristan. It gave no more details, and there was nothing to suggest it was the start of a major offensive.

Earlier, intelligence officials said army helicopter gunships killed one person in a car close to Miran Shah. It was not immediately clear whether they were referring to the same operation. As mentioned on Thursday, the Pakistani army ruled out launching any new offensives in the border area for at least six months. It said it wanted to consolidate gains it has made in other parts of the region over the last year, including in South Waziristan where a major offensive is now winding down. The Pakistani army has several bases in North Waziristan, but residents say soldiers rarely leave them and the region is in control of the militants. Faced with Pakistani inaction, the United States has launched scores of missiles strikes against militant targets there over the last 18 months.

La situación en Pakistán y su lugar en el mapa político-económico

 IIFOR ha investigado la situación en Pakistán en una estructural, de largo plazo. Como regla del pulgar un índice de Gini-menos de 35 indica el socialismo. Pakistán tiene un índice de Gini de 33, pero la baja eficiencia, un PIB per cápita de sólo 555 dólares de los EE.UU. (2003), y, por tanto, el grado de socialismo se estima que aproximadamente 50,3%, es decir, significativa (el grado de capitalismo es ca 49,7%). El grado de estatismo se estima que aproximadamente 94,7% (grado de autonomía ca 5,3%) Esta muy, muy importante grado de estatismo se debe a la relativamente baja esperanza de vida al nacer (años), una baja tasa de alfabetización de adultos ( 48,7) y un régimen represivo en general, también con una gran cantidad de ochlarchy (mob Estado en sentido amplio, incluido el terrorismo). Pakistán está clasificado como no 136 en el ranking de los países según el grado libertario, con un grado libertario a aproximadamente 24,4%, y un grado autoritario en ca 75,6%, véase http://www.anarchy.no/ranking . Html Es un totalitario, ultra-régimen autoritario, en el estado comunista-marxista el sector de cuadrante en el mapa político-económico, cerca de la izquierda-fascismo, véase http://www.anarchy.no/a_e_p_m.html    .  Un movimiento hacia un sistema democrático parlamentario probablemente no influyen en los parámetros estructurales del sistema de forma significativa en el Pakistán, no será democrático real, y por lo tanto, el sistema más probable es que permanezca el estado comunista en los próximos años, con un grado en sólo libertaria CA 24,4%. (28.12.2007)

 Condenamos enérgicamente este acto terrorista y presentar nuestras más profundas condolencias a la familia y amigos de Benazir Bhutto

 Benazir Bhutto murieron jueves después de un atentado suicida con bomba en un mitin político en Rawalpindi, Pakistán. La anarquía de Noruega condena enérgicamente este acto cobarde asesino por los extremistas que están tratando de socavar las tendencias hacia la democracia en Pakistán. Los que cometieron este crimen deben ser llevados ante la justicia. Bhutto sirvió dos veces como Primer Ministro de Pakistán entre 1988 y 1996. Ella había regresado a Pakistán de ocho años de exilio Octubre 18. Que su regreso a desfile en Karachi también fue blanco de un atacante suicida, matando a más de 140 personas. En esa ocasión se escaparon en sentido estricto lesión. Estamos profundamente conmovidos por la noticia del último ataque en Rawalpindi que se ha cobrado la vida de Benazir Bhutto y mataron al menos a otras 15 personas. Bhutto conocía los riesgos de su regreso a la campaña, pero está convencido de que su país necesita de ella. Instamos a Pakistán Benazir Bhutto en honor a la memoria continuando con la tendencia hacia un proceso democrático, para la que tan valientemente dieron su vida. Condenamos enérgicamente este acto terrorista y presentar nuestras más profundas condolencias a la familia y amigos de Benazir Bhutto. (Spanish translation by CNT-AIT Sagunto, (españa) Spain)

 Por Norges Anarkistråd (NACO)
 Landsråd S. Olsen
 27.12.2007

  Véase también http://www.dagsavisen.no/utenriks/article328635.ece

---

The freedom concept defined and related to anarchism etc.

by A. Quist 04.01.2008

In general there are positive freedom and negative freedom.

Positive and Negative Freedom/Liberty

Negative freedom/liberty is the absence of obstacles, barriers or constraints. One has negative freedom/liberty to the extent that actions are available to one in this negative sense. Positive freedom/liberty is the possibility of acting — or the fact of acting — in such a way as to take control of one's life and realize one's fundamental purposes. While negative liberty is usually attributed to individual agents, positive liberty is sometimes attributed to collectivities, or to individuals considered primarily as members of given collectivities, in anarchism collectivities/communes organized in a horizontal way.

The idea of distinguishing between a negative and a positive sense of the term 'liberty'/'freedom' goes back at least to Kant, and was examined and defended in depth by Isaiah Berlin in the 1950s and '60s. Kant defined anarchy as right/justice and freedom without violence . Discussions about positive and negative liberty/freedom normally take place within the context of political and social philosophy. They are distinct from, though sometimes related to, philosophical discussions about free will. Work on the nature of positive liberty often overlaps, however, with work on the nature of autonomy.

As Berlin showed, negative and positive liberty/freedom are not merely two distinct kinds of liberty; they can be seen as rival, incompatible interpretations of a political ideal. Since few people claim to be against liberty/freedom, the way this term is interpreted and defined can have important political implications. Political liberalism, of which "anarcho"-capitalism is the most extreme form, tends to presuppose a negative definition of liberty: liberals generally claim that if one favors individual liberty one should place strong limitations on the activities of the public sector, be it 1. anarchist or 2. state. Critics of liberalism, both 1. anarchists and 2. statists, often contest this implication by contesting the negative definition of liberty: they argue that the pursuit of liberty understood as self-realization or as self-determination (whether of the individual or of the collectivity) can require in case 1. use of a horizontally organized public sector, in case 2. state intervention, both normally not allowed by liberalists, including "anarcho"-capitalists.

Many authors prefer only to talk of positive and negative freedom. This is only a difference of style, and the terms ‘liberty' and ‘freedom' can be used interchangeably. Although some attempts have been made to distinguish between liberty and freedom, these have not caught on. Neither can they be translated into other European languages, which contain only the one term, of either Latin or Germanic origin (e.g. liberté, Freiheit, frihet), where English contains both.

It must be said that both positive and negative freedom can be interpreted in a libertarian way on the one hand, and an authoritarian way, on the other. Negative freedom has been used to defend property, i.e. theft, and positive freedom has been used to defend state socialism. Neither are correct interpretations from anarchits point of view. Berlin says cearly, "I am in a position to ignore the actual wishes of men or societies, to bully, oppress, torture in the name, and on behalf, of their ‘real' selves, in the secure knowledge that whatever is the true goal of man ... must be identical with his freedom" [Berlin, I., 1969, ‘Two Concepts of Liberty', in I. Berlin, Four Essays on Liberty, London: Oxford University Press. pp. 132-33]

Freedom, i.e. free people, freedom without damaging the freedom of other people .

Thus freedom on others' expense is not freedom, but repression/coercion.

Degrees of freedom

It is illogical to define freedom only identical to absolute freedom.

The only logical is that

1. The degree of freedom = absolute freedom - the degree of unfreedom <=>

2. The degree of freedom = 100% - the degree of unfreedom.

Thus when the degree of unfreedom is 0%, the person is 100% free, i.e. absolutely free. I would say that a degree of freedom above 50% is significant freedom, i.e. freedom, and a degree of freedom less than 50% is significant unfreedom, i.e. unfreedom.

By defining freedom only identical to absolute freedom you have a logical problem: What if the unfreedom is only 1%? Absolute 100% freedom - 1% unfreedom, is 99%. What is this this 99%? Cheese? No, it must be freedom.

Proudhon, Kropotkin, Malatesta and Bjørneboe mean that 100% absolute freedom/anarchy/anarchism is unrealistic. Thus a definition of freedom identical to absolute freedom, is unrealistic and utopian: Then freedom cannot, realistically seen, happen in practice.

Thus logically freedom, introducing the concept "absolute freedom", it is not an either-or concept, 100% or nothing. Freedom is about degrees. Anything else is illogical.

Freedom has both economical and political/administrative aspects.

Freedom is one of the basic principles of anarchism, perhaps the most basic. It has both economical and political/administrative aspects:
See http://www.anarchy.no/anarchism.html and http://www.anarchy.no/a_e_p_m.html and search for "freedom", within these files

An aspect of economical freedom - positive freedom

I don't agree that freedom per definiton is only "the absence of force and coercion" although corcion and force may limit freedom. Say, if everybody except one have zero real income, the gini-index is 100, the situation is unfree and coercive for everybody except the one having all the income, although there may be no physical coercion and force involved. Being rich indicates economical freedom, a large freedom of choice, i.e. a positive freedom. Being poor means less economical freedom, less freedom of choice. Even if the gini-index is 0, and if everybody has ca 0 real income, the economical freedom = ca 0 for all.

---

"Free" marketers and slave contracts

By A. Quist 27.02.2008

Do "free" marketers/"anarcho"-capitalists/right "libertarians support slave contracts? Yes.

(i) p = (1/(1-m))(w+rk)/a <=> w/p = [a(1-m) -rk/p] , if [a(1-m) -rk/p] is little the w/p, the real wage, is little and we have a relative slave wage and work on a slave contract.

R = total supply R , net national product, i.e. nominally; p price level for x, x net national product volume principally measured by output (i.e not input) in private and public sector, (R = px); a averagely workers productivity; r interest rate; K real capital; N employment, i.e. factual supply equal to factual demand of labor, x = aN; k capital/employment ratio; w = average wage for the people (grassroots remuneration), R net national product = realincome R = mR + wN + rK, distribution of realincome, where m = profit margin, i.e. market power coefficient (p - b')/p + scale coefficient ( b' - b)/p, were b' is marginal costs and b is average costs of resources, payments for resources, used to produce x, i.e. m = (p-b')/p + (b'-b)/p = (p-b)/p), where b = (wN+rK)/x, and b' = d(wN+rK)/dx. The scale coefficient reflects general scarcity of resources (positive) vs large scale effects (negative), summa seen all in all, for the whole production in the society, x. w/p is correlated negatively to the gini-index and positively to efficiency indicated with R per capita. As a rule of the thumb a gini-index above 35 indicates relative slave contracts, and a gini-index below 35 indicates free contracts. However we must also take into account R per capita to indicate slave contracts vs free contracts.

Empirical examples: Both Norway and Switzerland has a higher GDP per capita than the USA. In the relatively anarchist countries Norway and Switzerland, that are both socialist and autonomous, with more coercion-free regulated markets, the GDP per capita are 48,412 and 43,553 respectively, and the Gini-index 25.8 and 33.1, while the more "free" market based, and economically plutarchical USA has GDP per capita at 37,648 and a Gini-index at 40.8 (2003). Thus it indicates that socialist and autonomous countries, anarchist (at low degree) countries, with more free people and more coercion-free regulated markets, are both more efficient and have a more anarchist (equal) income distribution than the plutarchist more "free" market based USA. Economical plutarchy is relatively slavery. In Norway and Switzerland the workers have relatively free contracts, while in the USA they work on a relative slave contract. However USA is not the worst with respect to slave contracts. In most countries of the world the people (grassroots) are exposed to much worse slave contracts, see http://www.anarchy.no/ranking.html .

Do "free" marketers/"anarcho"-capitalists7right "libertarians support slave contracts? Yes. It may come as a surprise to many people, but right-"libertarianism" is one of the few political theories that justifies slavery. For example, Robert Nozick asks whether "a free system would allow [the individual] to sell himself into slavery" and he answers "I believe that it would." [Anarchy, State and Utopia, p. 371] Nozick's utopia are closer to "anarcho"-capitalism than anarchism. While some right-"libertarians" do not agree with Nozick in words, there is no logical basis in their ideology for such disagreement. It is just that they will not admit it openly, to try to avoid a negative reputation. The "anarcho"-capitalist system will most likely end up with a lot of slave contracts.

This can be seen from "anarcho"-capitalist Walter Block, who, like Nozick, supports voluntary slavery. As he puts it, "if I own something, I can sell it (and should be allowed by law to do so). If I can't sell, then, and to that extent, I really don't own it." Thus agreeing to sell yourself for a lifetime "is a bona fide contract" which, if "abrogated, theft occurs." He critiques those other right-wing "libertarians" (like Murray Rothbard) who oppose voluntary slavery as being inconsistent to their principles. Block, in his words, seeks to make "a tiny adjustment" which "strengthens libertarianism by making it more internally consistent." He argues that his position shows "that contract, predicated on private property [can] reach to the furthest realms of human interaction, even to voluntary slave contracts." ["Towards a Libertarian Theory of Inalienability: A Critique of Rothbard, Barnett, Smith, Kinsella, Gordon, and Epstein," pp. 39-85, Journal of Libertarian Studies, vol. 17, no. 2, p. 44, p. 48, p. 82 and p. 46]

So the logic is simple, you cannot really own something unless you can sell it. Self-ownership is one of the cornerstones of laissez-faire capitalist ideology. Therefore, since you own yourself you can sell yourself.

This defence of slavery/slave contracts should not come as a surprise to any one familiar with classical liberalism. An elitist ideology, its main rationale is to defend the liberty and power of property owners and justify unfree social relationships (such as government and wage slavery) in terms of "consent." Nozick and Block just takes it to its logical conclusion. This is because his position is not new but, as with so many other right-"libertarian" ones, can be found in John Locke's work. The key difference is that Locke refused the term "slavery" and favoured "drudgery" as, for him, slavery mean a relationship "between a lawful conqueror and a captive" where the former has the power of life and death over the latter. Once a "compact" is agreed between them, "an agreement for a limited power on the one side, and obedience on the other . . . slavery ceases." As long as the master could not kill the slave, then it was "drudgery." Like Nozick, he acknowledges that "men did sell themselves; but, it is plain, this was only to drudgery, not to slavery: for, it is evident, the person sold was not under an absolute, arbitrary, despotical power: for the master could not have power to kill him, at any time, whom, at a certain time, he was obliged to let go free out of his service." [Locke, Second Treatise of Government, Section 24] In other words, voluntary slavery was fine but just call it something else.

Not that Locke was bothered by involuntary slavery. He was heavily involved in the slave trade. He owned shares in the "Royal Africa Company" which carried on the slave trade for England, making a profit when he sold them. He also held a significant share in another slave company, the "Bahama Adventurers." In the "Second Treatise", Locke justified slavery in terms of "Captives taken in a just war," a war waged against aggressors. [Section 85] That, of course, had nothing to do with the actual slavery Locke profited from (slave raids were common, for example). Nor did his "liberal" principles stop him suggesting a constitution that would ensure that "every freeman of Carolina shall have absolute power and authority over his colored slaves." The constitution itself was typically autocratic and hierarchical, designed explicitly to "avoid erecting a numerous democracy." [The Works of John Locke, vol. X, p. 196]

So the notion of contractual slavery has a long history within right-wing liberalism, although most refuse to call it by that name. It is of course simply embarrassment that stops many right-"libertarians" calling a spade a spade. They incorrectly assume that slavery has to be involuntary. In fact, historically, voluntary slave contracts have been common (David Ellerman's Property and Contract in Economics has an excellent overview). Any new form of voluntary slavery would be a "civilised" form of slavery and could occur when an individual would "agree" to sell their lifetime's labor to another (as when a starving worker would "agree" to become a slave in return for food). In addition, the contract would be able to be broken under certain conditions (perhaps in return for breaking the contract, the former slave would have pay damages to his or her master for the labor their master would lose -- a sizeable amount no doubt and such a payment could result in debt slavery, which is the most common form of "civilised" slavery. Such damages may be agreed in the contract as a "performance bond" or "conditional exchange."

In summary, right-"libertarians" are talking about "civilised" slavery (or, in other words, civil slavery) and not forced slavery. While some may have reservations about calling it slavery, they agree with the basic concept that since people own themselves they can sell themselves via a slave contract.

We must stress that this is no academic debate. "Voluntary" slavery has been a problem in many societies and still exists in many countries today (particularly third world ones where bonded labor -- i.e. where debt is used to enslave people -- is the most common form). With the rise of sweat shops and child labor in many "developed" countries such as the USA, "voluntary" slavery (perhaps via debt and bonded labor) may become common in all parts of the world -- an ironic (if not surprising) result of "freeing" the market and being indifferent to the actual freedom of those within it.

Some right-"libertarians" are obviously uneasy with the logical conclusion of their definition of freedom. Murray Rothbard, for example, stressed the "unenforceability, in libertarian theory, of voluntary slave contracts." Of course, other "libertarian" theorists claim the exact opposite, so "libertarian theory" makes no such claim, but never mind! Essentially, his objection revolves around the assertion that a person "cannot, in nature, sell himself into slavery and have this sale enforced -- for this would mean that his future will over his own body was being surrendered in advance" and that if a "laborer remains totally subservient to his master's will voluntarily, he is not yet a slave since his submission is voluntary." However Rothbard's emphasis on quitting fails to recognize the actual denial of will and control over ones own body that is explicit in wage slavery. It is this failure that pro-slave contract "libertarians" stress -- they consider the slave contract as an extended wage contract. Moreover, a modern slave contract would likely take the form of a "performance bond," on which Rothbard laments about its "unfortunate suppression" by the state. In such a system, the slave could agree to perform X years labor or pay their master substantial damages if they fail to do so. It is the threat of damages that enforces the contract and such a "contract" Rothbard does agree is enforceable. Another means of creating slave contracts would be "conditional exchange" which Rothbard also supports. As for debt bondage, that too, seems acceptable. He surreally notes that paying damages and debts in such contracts is fine as "money, of course, is alienable" and so forgets that it needs to be earned by labor which, he asserts, is not alienable! [The Ethics of Liberty, pp. 134-135, p. 40, pp. 136-9, p. 141 and p. 138]

It should be noted that the slavery contract cannot be null and void because it is unenforceable, as Rothbard suggests. This is because the doctrine of specific performance applies to all contracts, not just to labor contracts. This is because all contracts specify some future performance. In the case of the long time labor contract, then it can be broken as long as the slave pays any appropriate damages. As Rothbard puts it elsewhere, "if A has agreed to work for life for B in exchange for 10,000 grams of gold, he will have to return the proportionate amount of property if he terminates the arrangement and ceases to work." [Man, Economy, and State, vol. I , p. 441] This is understandable, as the law generally allows material damages for breached contracts, as does Rothbard in his support for the "performance bond" and "conditional exchange." Needless to say, having to pay such damages (either as a lump sum or over a period of time) could turn the worker into the most common type of modern slave, the debt-slave.

And it is interesting to note that even Murray Rothbard is not against the selling of humans. He argued that children are the property of their parents who can (bar actually murdering them by violence) do whatever they please with them, even sell them on a "flourishing free child market." [The Ethics of Liberty, p. 102] Combined with a whole hearted support for child labor (after all, the child can leave its parents if it objects to working for them) such a "free child market" could easily become a "child slave market" -- with entrepreneurs making a healthy profit selling infants and children or their labor to capitalists (as did occur in 19th century Britain). Unsurprisingly, Rothbard ignores the possible nasty aspects of such a market in human flesh (such as children being sold to work in factories, homes and brothels). But this is besides the point.

Of course, this theoretical justification for slavery at the heart of an ideology calling itself "libertarianism" is hard for many right-"libertarians" to accept and so they argue that such contracts would be very hard to enforce. This attempt to get out of the contradiction fails simply because it ignores the nature of the capitalist market. If there is a demand for slave contracts to be enforced, then companies will develop to provide that "service" (and it would be interesting to see how two "protection" firms, one defending slave contracts and another not, could compromise and reach a peaceful agreement over whether slave contracts were valid). Thus we could see a so-called "free" society producing companies whose specific purpose was to hunt down escaped slaves (i.e. individuals in slave contracts who have not paid damages to their owners for freedom). Of course, perhaps Rothbard would claim that such slave contracts would be "outlawed" under his "general libertarian law code" but this is a denial of market "freedom". If slave contracts are "banned" then surely this is paternalism, stopping individuals from contracting out their "labor services" to whom and however long they "desire". You cannot have it both ways.

So, ironically, an ideology proclaiming itself to support "liberty" ends up justifying and defending slavery/slave contracts. Indeed, for the right-"libertarian" the slave contract is an exemplification, not the denial, of the individual's liberty! How is this possible? How can slavery be supported as an expression of liberty? Simple, right-"libertarian" support for slavery is a symptom of a deeper authoritarianism, namely their uncritical acceptance of contract theory. The central claim of contract theory is that contract is the means to secure and enhance individual freedom. Slavery is the antithesis to freedom and so, in theory, contract and slavery must be mutually exclusive. However, as indicated above, some contract theorists (past and present) have included slave contracts among legitimate contracts. This suggests that contract theory cannot provide the theoretical support needed to secure and enhance individual freedom.

As Carole Pateman argues, "contract theory is primarily about a way of creating social relations constituted by subordination, not about exchange." Rather than undermining subordination, contract theorists justify modern subjection -- "contract doctrine has proclaimed that subjection to a master -- a boss, a husband -- is freedom." [The Sexual Contract, p. 40 and p. 146] The question central to contract theory (and so right-libertarianism) is not "are people free" (as one would expect) but "are people free to subordinate themselves in any manner they please." A radically different question and one only fitting to someone who does not know what liberty means.

Anarchists argue that not all contracts are legitimate and no free individual can make a contract that denies his or her own freedom. If an individual is able to express themselves by making free agreements then those free agreements must also be based upon freedom internally as well. Any agreement that creates domination or hierarchy negates the assumptions underlying the agreement and makes itself null and void. In other words, voluntary government is still government and a defining characteristic of an anarchy must be, surely, "no government" and "no rulers."

The right-"libertarian" support for slave contracts (and wage slavery) indicates that their ideology has little to do with liberty and far more to do with justifying property and the oppression and exploitation it produces. Their theoretical support for permanent and temporary voluntary slavery and autocracy indicates a deeper authoritarianism which negates their claims to be libertarians.

Reasons for relative slave contracts in a "free" market

(i) p = (1/(1-m))(w+rk)/a <=> w/p = [a(1-m) -rk/p] , if [a(1-m) -rk/p] is little the w/p, the real wage, is little and we have a relative slave wage and work on a slave contract.

R = total supply R , net national product, i.e. nominally; p price level for x, x net national product volume principally measured by output (i.e not input) in private and public sector, (R = px); a averagely workers productivity; r interest rate; K real capital; N employment, i.e. factual supply equal to factual demand of labor, x = aN; k capital/employment ratio; w = average wage, for the people (grassroots remuneration). R net national product = realincome R = mR + wN + rK, distribution of realincome, where m = profit margin, i.e. market power coefficient (p - b')/p + scale coefficient ( b' - b)/p, were b' is marginal costs and b is average costs of resources, payments for resources, used to produce x, i.e. m = (p-b')/p + (b'-b)/p = (p-b)/p), where b = (wN+rK)/x, and b' = d(wN+rK)/dx. The scale coefficient reflects general scarcity of resources (positive) vs large scale effects (negative), summa seen all in all, for the whole production in the society, x. w/p is correlated negatively to the gini-index and positively to efficiency indicated with R per capita. As a rule of the thumb a gini-index above 35 indicates relative slave contracts, and a gini-index below 35 indicates free contracts. However we must also take into account R per capita to indicate slave contracts vs free contracts.

Free contracts vs slave contracts is a relative question. Here we see the question for a society as a whole, it may be a commune or a country. Basic reasons for a relatively little or low w/p, i.e. the grassrots work on relative slave contracts, are found in (i). [a(1-m) - rk/p] = w/p, i.e. a increases the w/p, m reduces it, r multiplied with k deflated with p, reduce it. Thus a system with m = 0, zero profit margin, and r = 0, zero interest rate, and a relatively high a, labor productivity, gives maximum w/p, real wage, for the grassroots, i.e. the most free contract. A system with marginal m and r will be close to the most free contract. The higher m and r and lower a, the less free contracts and the more tendency towards slave contracts, and worse the higher k/p are. If w/p is significantly low or little we have relative slave contracts. k and a are usually positively correlated. We have here assumed that the grassroots, workers, at average has marginal to zero income from profit and interest. The profit margin, m = market power coefficient + scale coefficient. Thus even if the market power coefficient is zero, there may be positive m, if the scale coefficient is > 0. Thus m > 0 is not only a question of market power.

It is correct that a long term equilibrium in an utopian 100% free competition neoclassical economic model will have no market power, but in reality a 100% deregulated, "free" market, will not fulfil the assumptions behind this model. There is no-one to enforce these assumptions/conditions. Say, within the framework of a "free" market/"anarcho"-capitalism/right "libertarianism", the richest majority of a society may organize a mutual "defense" contract with mercenaries to impose barriers to entry, and thus achieve market power > 0. In general the bargaining power of the working class (grassroots) may be small compared to the employers, and thus result in a relative low real wage, i.e. work on relative slave contracts. Even a long term equilibrium in an utopian 100% free competition neoclassical economic model will not have r = zero or close to. If there is no regulations by a peoples bank, i.e. an anarchist clearing house (based on labor notes credit) or a central bank, the interest rate in a society based on "free" market/"anarcho"-capitalism/right "libertarianism" will probably be relatively high. The AI is for free contracts, as opposed to slave contracts. If you think you are exposed to a slave contract you may sue via the anarchist courts and law and order as suggested by AI. This is regulations "from within", by the people really concerned, not "imposed regulation". The "free" market/"anarcho"capitalism/right "libertarianism, has no such courts, and thus it will very likely result in slave contracts. All in all a system based on "free" market/"anarcho"-capitalism/right "libertarianism, will very likely be, or end up in, relative slave contracts.

The defense of "free" markets from "free" marketers/"anarcho"-capitalists/right "libertarians" has no firm scientifical basis, based on facts and sound argumentation.

1. IIFOR's conclusion based on research: "Both Norway and Switzerland have a higher GDP per capita than the USA. In the relatively anarchist countries Norway and Switzerland, that are both socialist and autonomous, with more coercion-free regulated markets, the GDP per capita are 48,412 and 43,553 respectively, and the Gini-index 25.8 and 33.1, while the more "free" market based, and economically plutarchical USA has GDP per capita at 37,648 and a Gini-index at 40.8. Thus it indicates that socialist and autonomous countries, anarchist (at low degree) countries, with more free people and more coercion-free regulated markets are both more efficient and has a more anarchist (equal) income distribution than the plutarchist more "free" market based USA," stands firm. Economical plutarchy is relatively slavery. Nobody has rejected this hypothesis by facts and sound matter of fact arguments. Only the combination socialism and autonomy gives efficiency plus low gini-index, relative free contracts. Statism and/or capitalism, i.e. economical plutarchy (relative "free" markets), gives relative slave contracts, and more or less inefficiency.

2. That liberalism, capitalism plus autonomy (relative "free" market), usually is more efficient than statism plus socialism (marxism, say Sweden and the Soviet Union) and statism plus capitalism (fascism, say China and Iran) is of course no news to me and IIFOR. But the gini-index is high.

IIFOR, see http://www.anarchy.no/iifor.html , has done a lot of research on the degree of unregulated markets in different countries, along several dimensions, but it has not published much of it yet. It is true that you can draw an extrapolation, say, from the anarchies of low degree with reasonable regulated markets, Norway via Switzerland, to the conservative liberalist USA, with less regulated markets, to"anarcho"-capitalism, with 100% unregulated markets. The authoritarian market failurs increase with the deregulation - the more "free" markets the worse, i.e. more relative slave contracts broadly defined. But of course 2. is valid.

By the way I, AI and IIFOR have never said USA is close to 100% "free" market capitalism, but that USA is more capitalist and closer to 100% "free" market capitalism than Norway and Switzerland. The degree of capitalism in USA is estimated by IIFOR to ca 75,5 %, Switzerland ca 49,0 % and Norway ca 45,0 %. From "THE 25 HIGHEST RANKING COUNTRIES ACCORDING TO LIBERTARIAN DEGREE ETC. SYSTEM ANALYSIS" see http://www.anarchy.no/ai2008.html .

"Free" marketers, anarcho"-capitalists and right "libertarians" on the economic-political map

The set of economic-political systems of "free" marketers (people that call themselves market "anarchists"), A, anarcho"-capitalists, B, and right "libertarians", C, are close to each other on the economic-political map, see http://www.anarchy.no/a_e_p_m.html, and sometimes overlapping each other. The logical union of these systems (A U B U C) , all in all is found within the set covering the sector of individualism and right liberalism, D, in the liberalist quadrant of the map, set E. We have thus (A U B U C) is wholly within D which is wholly within E.

I have read a lot of the "free" marketers (people that call themselves market "anarchists"), A, anarcho"-capitalists, B, and right "libertarians", C, stuff, from Bastiat to Rothbard, throughout the years, and done system analysis on it. I have come to the conclusion that they, A, B, and C are the same except for marginal differences, a little more or less degree of capitalism (economical plutarchy) and/or a little more or less degree of statism. They are all found within the quadrant of liberalism E on the economic-political map, most in the sector of individualism (without adjective) and some in the sector of right liberalism (as the so called Libertarian Party). They are not found in the quadrant of anarchism. See the anarchist Economic-Political Map, EPM, at http://www.anarchy.no/a_e_p_m.html . A free market, i.e. a true free market, not a "free" market, is autonomous and socialist, without plutarchy economical and/or political administrative, i.e. with free contracts, not slave contracts, in short anarchistic.

Sources: http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/1931/secF2.html and http://www.anarchy.no/aneco1.html

---

The logic of collective action and anarchism

by A. Quist 05.02.2007

The "Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups" is a book by Mancur Olson, Jr. first published in 1965. It develops a theory of political science and economics of concentrated benefits verses diffuse costs.

The book challenged accepted wisdom in Olson's day that 1) if everyone in a group has interests in common, then they will act collectively to achieve them; and 2) in a democracy, the greatest concern is that the majority will tyrannize and exploit the minority. This should be stopped by anarchist laws.

The book argues that individuals in any group attempting collective action will have incentives to "free ride" on the efforts of others if the group is working to provide public goods. Individuals will not "free ride" in groups which provide benefits only to active participants.

Public goods are usually goods which are non-excludable (i.e. one person cannot reasonably prevent another from consuming the good) and non-rival (one person's consumption of the good does not affect another's, nor vice-versa). NB! Hence, without selective incentives to motivate participation, collective action is unlikely to occur even when large groups of people with common interests exist.

The book also noted that large groups will face relatively high costs when attempting to organize for collective action while small groups will face relatively low costs. Furthermore, individuals in large groups will gain relatively less per capita of successful collective action; individuals in small groups will gain relatively more per capita through successful collective action. Hence, in the absence of collective incentives, the incentive for group action diminishes as group size increases, so that large groups are less able to act in their common interest than small ones.

The book concludes that, not only will collective action by large groups be difficult to achieve even when they have interests in common, but situations could also occur where the minority (bound together by concentrated selective incentives) can dominate the majority. This should be avoided with anarchist laws.

The remedies to overcome these problems are firm organizations in a horizontal way.

The general idea is that the people really concerned of a case should be the ones that decide, in a horizontal way, alone in individual matters, two toghether in bilateral matters, three toghether in trilateral matters, etc., local matters decided locally, regional matters regionally, and general cases for a whole society (say a country) decided by all members of society together (preferably with general concent). Thus individually, locally and regionally, there may be several different systems within the framework of horizontal organizations, but for the general cases for a whole society, there may be only one system at a time, as far as the AI and IAT can see today. This general organization may of course change over time, because horizontal organization always may be improved, different working hypothesis may be put in place and rejected if it doesn't work. etc. But there must be ways to decide in general matters in an orderly anarchist way, or else it will be chaotic and ochlarchy. This could be investigated more. There may be several ways to make general decisions, that is reasonable horizontal.

To avoid "free riding" etc. the anarchist law and court systems are a must.

Anarchist laws, according to the principles of social justice and the negation of juridical laws, should be decided by the people, direct democratic or by delegates, and compatible with anarchist principles in general, human rights included, rooted back to natural law . Juridical laws mainly mean decided by authorities, lawyers, the mob, etc., i.e. authoritarian laws. As an example, most of the laws in Norway are non-authoritarian, there are however also some authoritarian laws, because the degree of anarchy is only ca 53-54%, i.e. significant anarchist, but not ideal. Thus, the law and court system of anarchy is quite similar to other democratic law and court systems, only less authoritarian, and more reflecting human rights (interpreted in an anarchist, non-authoritarian way). The International Anarchist Tribunals of I.F.A./A.I. are a special branch of anarchist law and court systems, see http://www.anarchy.no/iat.html .

The general idea is that anarchist laws should be decided from the bottom, the people, and upwards, not from the top downwards. That is law without State in the anarchist meaning. The people decide their own laws when the laws are decided. Thus it is selfmanagement. Of course the minorities rights must be respected in case of anarchist direct democracy, according to anarchist principles. Preferably decisions shold be made by general consent. In case where this is not possible the majority will decide, but they must compensate the minority in different ways to secure their rights. Economic compensation may sometimes be used. In anyway the majority will only be able to offer the minority a free contract, not a slave contract. Thus majority dictatorship will be avoided, as well as minority dictatorship, in an anarchist direct democracy.

The markets (private sector) in general will not be efficient (Pareto-optimal) in dealing with collective goods and services, i.e. goods which are non-excludable (i.e. one person cannot reasonably prevent another from consuming the good) and non-rival (one person's consumption of the good does not affect another's, nor vice-versa). It will typically be a case of authoritarian market failure, if you try to solve production and distribution of collective goods and services via the market (private sector) . One reason for this is the" free rider" problem.

---

Anarchism vs "free" markets/"anarcho"-capitalism

by A. Quist 26.02.2008

" Crank economics never cease to amaze me. Nothing is free. Of course, in a free-market things get very cheap and the computing industry is more or less free-market based. But to think that something can be really 'free' just leads to confusion." From a comment to "Free! Why $0.00 Is the Future of Business", i.e. nonsense. There will always be scarcity seen in macro, and in micro the following is valid: In general goods and servicses should be priced according to long time marginal social costs (plus, under certain conditions, a prevalent mark up and VAT), to achieve Pareto-optimality, i.e. efficiency.  A subset of these prices will also be fair. Thus prices should in general, unless special cases, not be set at zero. Prices set = zero is crank economics, diseconomics.

I will explain why 100% unregulated markets, or close to, are authoritarian (and bad) below:

A 100% unregulated market, i.e. a "free" market = anarcho-capitalism or something similar. Anarchists and "anarcho"-capitalists are basically not for the same things and against the same things. The "anarcho"-capitalists have a liberalist state concept (in short the outdated state-concept of Max Weber; more about Max Weber's outdated definitions of state and anarchy, and the modern definitions, see http://www.anarchy.no/begreper.html .), the anarchists have an anarchist state concept, i.e. government/states are systems with significantly large rank and/or income differences (and inefficient), and anarchist systems have significantly small rank and income differences, plus efficiency. "Anarcho"-capitalist systems have most likely significant large rank and/or income differences, and are thus government/states, basically economical plutarchy.

To be considered anarchists the "free" marketers/"anarcho"-capitalists must accept the anarchist government/state concept, and the anarchist concept, and that means some regulations of the "free" market, to avoid slave contracts of different kinds, and stop believing that the ghost of Adam Smith's "invisible hand" will solve the coercion/repression problems with "free" markets.

The twisted "logic" of the "free" marketers is that there exist only two alternatives: Either "free" markets, 100% private sector, 100% unregulated markets, or the state. It is an ideology ("religion" , not science, with only one devil - the State). As an alternative to the state, AI suggests a private sector with more or less regulated markets and a significantly horizontally organized public sector.

Comparison of a) the relatively anarchist countries Norway and Switzerland with the more "free" market based USA, and an extrapolation of this, b) scenarioanalysis based on practically always valid ecocirc-relations, and c) other relevant economic models, shows that there very probable exist a lot of factual coercion-problems/repression, i.e. authoritarian market failures, with "free" markets, from anarchist point of view:

1. significant income hierarchy and slave contracts in connection with property, i.e. theft, (see "Free" marketers and slave contracts" at http://www.anarchy.no/andebate.html )

2. environmental problems, (environmental externalities, etc, see http://www.anarchy.no/eam.html , especially the footnote)

3. business-bubbles/cycles and unvoluntary unemployment, (see http://www.anarchy.no/aneco1.html )

4. no real law and order for the relatively poor (see Anarchism vs "anarcho"-capitalist "law and order", at http://www.anarchy.no/andebate.html ), and

5. highly disoptimal production and distribution of collective and semicollective goods and services. (See The logic of collective action and anarchism, at http://www.anarchy.no/andebate.html )

All this add up to economical plutarchy broadly defined, i.e. not anarchy. Although the exchange in itself is voluntary, the whole situation is repressive: Life is more than exchange. "Free" market anarchism = anarchy (economical) plutarchy = an oxymoron.

This is basically an anarchist criticism of the "free"-market. Other groups are also pointing to these problems, they are however objectively factual and cannot be neglected, but other groups have more or less statist solutions to these problems. AI has significant anarchist solutions.

As mentioned the twisted "logic" of the "free" marketers/"anarcho"-capitalists is that there exist only two alternatives: Either "free" markets, 100% private sector, or the state. Thus it is an ideology ("religion", not science, with only one devil - the State. This twisted logic forces the "free" -marketers to:

A. Try to neglect the factual problems 1-5 mentioned above - saying this is no problem in different ways - but it is, and it will not go away. They are factual coercion/repression problems with "free" markets.

B. Wrongly postulating that it is just a statist criticism, and thus we can neglect it. But it is also the result of an anarchist criticism, so it cannot be neglected.

C. Say that the solution to this problems are necessarely statist, and thus is not anarchist. This is not true. AI suggests several significantly anarchist solutions to these problems 1-5. But they are not compatible with 100% "free" markets, which is not significantly anarchist at all.

Anarchism is about autonomy and socialism, see http://www.anarchy.no/a_e_p_m.html and http://www.anarchy.no/anarchism.html .

Thus the term socialist in socialist anarchism is reduntant. All real anarchisms are socialist more or less, but significant. Say, individualist anarchism is anarchism, but "anarcho"-capitalism is not.

* Anarchist ideal and principles: The aim is more anarchist systems, i.e. a movement towards more human rights and the best of the ideals of the French revolution, fairness and efficiency, less rank and income differences. The word anarchy origins from greek. The prefix an means negation of, as in anaerobe vs aerobe; and arch means superior, i.e. in contrast to subordinates, as in archbishop. Anarchy, anarchism, anarchist, etc. are alternatives to, and the opposite of, different forms of superior and subordinate positions, non economic and economically: Political/administrative rank and economic/income hierarchies broadly defined and in real terms, i.e. respectively (1) statism and (2) capitalism (economical plutarchy).

* Thus: Anarchy, anarchism, anarchist a.s.o. mean coordination on equal footing, without superiors and subordinates, i.e. horizontal organization and co-operation without coercion, ideally or practically.

Not all who call themselves anarchists are anarchists. The first who are exluded are of course police provokers, and ochlarchists, see http://www.anarchy.no/oslo.html . But also other groups that call themselves anarchists are in reality not anarchists.

For a precise, short and consistent definition of anarchism vs other -isms, see http://www.anarchy.no/anarchism.html especially the axioms (1) -(10).

Anarchy is about a horizontally organized public sector and a horizontally organized private sector, included efficiency.

Summarized: For anarchists one aim to do away with government is less rank and income differences, and both are equally important. For "anarcho"-capitalists/"free" marketers less income-differences is not an aim at all. They give a damn in the gini-index, income hierarchy, and economical plutarchy. They are not against rank differences either, as they accept big business with large rank and income differences. Furthermore they are against a horizontally organized public sector. They will have 100% pivate sector, mixing up public sector with government. They deny wrongly that "free" markets have a lot of coercion/repression, top heavy incomehierarchy, environmental problems, unemployment and business cycles, no real law and order, etc. They will have economical plutarchy broadly defined - we will not. We will not live in a society with a large giniindex and other market coercion. "Anarcho"-capitalism is thus anarcho-economical plutarchy, an oxymoron. Thus we, AI etc, do not have the same aim as the "anarcho"-capitalists, there is no common ground. We will not associate with these persons.

"Anarcho"capitalism is, or will probably end up in, economical plutarchy broadly defined. Free people don't mean 100% unregulated markets. Criticism of market "anarchism"

Anarchism is, a. o. t., based on dialog and free, matter of fact, criticism. Although this free matter of fact criticism was originally pinted towards Francois Tremblay, a well known market "anarchist", I mean that this criticism is rather general and very much relevant for market anarchists in general.  As far as I can see, Francois Tremblay's ideas on the matter, are quite representative for market anarchists in general.

Markets with slave contracts etc. vs green economy:

Quoted from Francois Tremblay's market anarchist page: A. "In business, the stronger impacts strenght to the weaker" and B. "The issue is always the same, the government or the market, there is no third solution."

Ad A, markets may very well be based on slave contracts and property etc i.e. authoritarian and coercive, and not free contracts and possession etc, i.e. libertarian. In general markets may have a lot of authoritarian coercive market failures, that need regulations from a horizontally organized public sector, to be done significantly away with. These regulations are done "from within" by the people really concerned in a horizontal way, and not "from outside" by an authority/state.

Thus A is not valid as a general statement.

Ad B, Francois Tremblay wrote: "What I think you don't understand is that there's no such thing as a non-market organization under an Anarchy."

I do not agree. You use an unrealistic too wide definition of markets. Usually in anarchism a market is defined in the following way:

A market is here defined as a social arrangement that allows buyers and sellers to discover information and carry out a voluntary exchange of goods or services. We as human beings are exposed to

1. market goods and services, which we usually can buy to that extent as marginal utility is equal to the price [the maximization of utility will make the (marginal utility)/price = the marginal utility of income. If you choose to measure utility in terms of income (money or labor notes), the marginal utility of income = 1, and thus marginal utility = price].
, and

2. environmental goods (or bads) and services, that we cannot buy in that way (however prices = marginal utility, on these factors can be estimated, see *) at http://www.anarchy.no/eam.html ), as well as

3. some free goods and services that can be consumed freely to no price, i.e. it can be consumed to that extent that marginal utility is zero.

Thus the end use of public goods such as a public park or a public road, i.e. not based on sellers and buyer, is not a part of the market. Public goods and services will be either type 2 or type 3, not 1.

Type 2 and 3 goods and services are not consumed/exchanged via markets.

Thus under anarchism a large part of the economy will not be based on markets,
see the Eco-Anarchist Manifesto at http://www.anarchy.no/eam.html , and anarchist economics in general at http://www.anarchy.no/aneco1.html .

This is green economy, a third way between/outside markets and government, managed by a horizontally organized consensus based participatory democracy, in anarchism, i.e. managed by a horizontally organized, anarchist, public sector.

Thus B is in general not valid.

The term "market anarchism" is not mentioned or used on the www.anarchy.no , but the Eco-Anarchist Manifesto http://www.anarchy.no/eam.html states: "There will be a) no real anarchism without ecology sufficiently integrated, just market* orientated half-anarchism, and b) no real ecology without anarchism in a societal perspective, only authoritarian or pseudolibertarian half-environmentalism."

More about private sector (markets) vs public sector

Anarchies very briefly defined are systems with small rank and income differences, plus efficiency. Any ownership that is compatible with systems with small rank and income differences, plus efficiency, is possession. Possession may be individual or collective, private or public. 1. Any ownership that results in large income differences is capitalist, economical plutarchy. 2. Any ownership that results in large rank differences is statist. 1. and 2. are property, i.e. theft, not possession.

Society is public sector plus private sector, both significantly horizontally organized in an anarchy. What is public? Latin, publicus, from populus, people. Public may a) be state/government or b) horizontally organized, without ruler(s) and ruled, i.e. for b): 1. It means of, belonging, concerning, or pertaining to the people of a community, as a whole, say, an anarchist commune as Kropotkin defined it. 2. open to common use; for the use or benefit of all, as a public park or public road, etc. 3. known by, or open to the knowledge of all or most of the people; as, "he/she will make this information public". Public is opposed to private. A market is here defined as a social arrangement that allows buyers and sellers to discover information and carry out a voluntary exchange of goods or services. The private sector is based on markets, plus of course family life. Where there are no markets and no family life, we have a public sector. Furthermore, the private sector must be horizontally organized to be anarchist. That is based on possession, not property, i.e. theft, based on free contracts, not slave contracts, in general be without authoritarian market failures. This indicates some market regulations, from within, selfregulation, decided by the people really concerned, and not imposed by a government, to do away with authoritarian market failures in general. Thus 100% unregulated markets are at odds with anarchism.

A keyword in the organizing of an anarchist public sector is participatory democracy. Participatory democracy is per definition a collective decision making prosess, outside the market. The general idea, for society close to the anarchist ideal, is that the people really concerned of a case should be the ones that decide, in a horizontal way, alone in individual matters, two toghether in bilateral matters, three toghether in trilateral matters, etc. Thus freedom etc. have both individual and collective aspects.

The public sector, horizontally organized, in an anarchy of a very high degree, follows the pattern of communes, as explained by Kropotkin:" The "Commune" is no linger a territorial agglomeration; but...a synonym for the grouping of equals, knowing no borders, no walls. The social Commune... will cease to be clearly defined. Each group of the Commune will necessarily be attracted to similar groups of other Communes; they will group together, federate with each other, by bonds at least as solid as those tying them to their fellow townsmen; (they will) constitute a Commune of interests, of which members will be diseminated through a thousand cities and villages. Each individual will find satisfaction of his needs only in grouping together with other individuals (that) have the same tastes and living in a hundred other Communes." [From "Words of a Rebel", quoted by P. Berman in "Quotations from the Anarchists", New York, 1972, p. 171.] Furthermore, especially valid for the horizontally organized public sector: " In a society developed on these lines, the voluntary associations which already now begin to cover all the fields of human activity would take a still greater extension so as to substitute themselves for the state in all its functions." [From "Anarchism", by Pjotr Kropotkin, The Encyclopaedia Britannica , 1910.]

Financing the public sector - social subscription vs taxes: We are here first discussing the anarchist ideal. If the people, say in a commune, decide with general consent a social subscription to finance a horizontally organized public sector, then it is 100% voluntarely. Thus there is no taxation involved. General consent is that a lot are for, and no one is against. In an anarchy of a high degree all the members of the society are anarchists and they have developed a consensus culture based on negotiations and a will to come to an agreement. In the case where there is no general consent, the majority may decide a social subscription for their part only to finance the public sector.

Proudhon on public vs private sector, regulations, etc.

"[Anarchy] ... the ideal of human government... centuries will pass before that ideal is attained, but our law is to go in that direction, to grow unceasingly nearer to that end, and thus I would uphold the principle of federation.  ...it is unlikely that all traces of government or authority will disappear...  By the word [anarchy] I wanted to indicate the extreme limit of political progress. Anarchy is... a form of government or constitution in which public and private consciousness, formed through the development of science and law, is alone sufficient to maintain order and guarantee all liberties... The institutions of the police, preventative and repressive methods officialdom, taxation etc., are reduced to a minimum... monarchy and intensive centralization disappear, to be replaced by federal institutions and a pattern of life based upon the commune.  Since the two principles, Authority and Liberty, which underlie all forms organized society, are on the one hand contrary to each other, in a perpetual state of conflict, and on the other can neither eliminate each other nor be resolved, some kind of compromise between the two is necessary. Whatever the system favored, whether it be monarchical, democratic, communist or anarchist, its length of life will depend to the extent to which it has taken the contrary principle into account.  ...that monarchy and democracy, communism and anarchy, all of them unable to realize themselves in the purity of their concepts, are obliged to complement one another by mutual borrowings. There is surely something here to dampen the intolerance of fanatics who cannot listen to a contrary opinion... They should learn, then, poor wretches, that they are themselves necessarily disloyal to their principles, that their political creeds are tissues of inconsistencies... contradiction lies at the root of all programs.  ...writers have mistakenly introduced a political assumption as false as it is dangerous, in failing to distinguish practice from theory, the real, from the ideal... every real government is necessarily mixed...   In a free society, the role of the government is essentially that of legislating, instituting, creating, beginning, establishing, as little as possible should it be executive... The state is not an entrepreneur... Once a beginning has been made, the machinery established, the state withdraws, leaving the execution of the task to local authorities and citizens.  [Coinage] ...it is an industry left to the towns. That there should be an inspector to supervise its manufacture I admit, but the role of the state extends no farther than that." From http://www.anarchy.no/proudhon.html .

In general the more possession in the Proudhonian sence, the less regulations are necessary to avoid slave contracts and property (theft) as defined by IIFOR and AI, see http://www.anarchy.no/proudhon.html . The more "naked" property or "barest" forms of property, the stronger regulations are necessary to avoid slave contracts and property (theft) as defined by IIFOR and AI.

Free market vs "free" markets, i.e 100% unregulated markets

The important question is not what you are against, state, but what you are for, anarchy. There are different definitions of state and anarchy, but at least we have to agree on the basics to remove the state and introduce anarchy. Different kinds of anarchism may to some extent exist side by side, but it is clear that "anarcho"capitalism/"free" markets are not compatible with anarchism. "Free" markets must not be mixed up with free markets.

There is a difference between free markets, i.e. regulated a bit to avoid slave contracts and authoritarian market failures in general, and the 100% unregulated "free" market, that usually have slave contracts and authoritarian market failures in general.

The regulations necessary to get a free market, and avoid "free" markets, are done by the people really concerned, in a horizontally organized, anarchist, public sector, including law and order. If you think you are exposed to a slave contract you may take it to the anarchist court.

Slavery, without contract, and as such, is not the same as working on a slave contract. Slave contract is a relative concept. Working on a slave contract, "voluntarely" accepted, may be quite productive, but it is the profiter (say, owner of the factory) that benefits most, not the person working on a slave contract.

It is clear that "anarcho"-capitalism allows for slave contracts as long as they are "voluntarely". If I had the choice of starving to death or accept a slave contract I would rather accept it "voluntarely" than starve to death. For more information on "free" markets and "anarcho" capitalism vis-a-vis slave contracts, see "Free" marketers and slave contracts, at http://www.anarchy.no/andebate.html . Anarchism does not accept slave contracts, only free contracts.

Nozick in his book "Anarchy, State and Utopia" explicitely says he accepts slave contracts. "Anarcho"capitalism is even more "free" markets than Nozick's utopia, and will most likely have a lot of slave contracts.

As I mentioned: "The important question is not what you are against, state, but what you are for, anarchy. There are different definitions of state and anarchy, but at least we have to agree on the basics to remove the state and introduce anarchy."

Or else doing away with the "state" will end up in ochlarchy, mob rule broadly defined, or "anarcho"- capitalism, i.e. economical plutarchy, and not anarchy.

Anarchism is about free people, not "free" markets in the meaning 100% unregulated markets, or close to. 100 % unregulated markets (the markets are "free" ), or close to, will have slave contracts and authoritarian market failures, i.e. not free people. With a free market, as opposed to "free" markets, I mean a market with free people, based on free contracts, as opposed to slave contracts, etc, and that is a bit regulated market, via a significantly horizontally organized public sector. An anarchist economic-political system has a private sector with free markets as defined in this way, plus a horizontally organized public sector, i.e. not markets. A free market, i.e. a true free market, not a "free" market, is autonomous and socialist, without plutarchy economical and/or political administrative, i.e. with free contracts, not slave contracts, in short anarchistic.

---

"Free" marketers/"anarcho"-capitalists are statists

by A. Quists 07.04.2008

We have explained why "anarcho"capitalism, a 100% deregulated/unregulated market, is, or will very likely end up, in, economical plutarchy, at A. ""Free" marketers and slave contracts" and "Anarchism vs " free" markets/"anarcho"-capitalism" by me at http://www.anarchy.no/andebate.html and Anarchism vs "anarcho"-capitalist "law and order" by H. Fagerhus at http://www.anarchy.no/andebate.html , and "PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS VS POSSESSION IN ANARCHIST LAW" by P. Johansen at http://www.anarchy.no/andebate.html .

No state, in the narrow meaning of hierarchical public sector, is necessary for economical plutarchy to exist. It is entirely a function of a 100% deregulated/unregulated market. Nobody has refuted the conclusions from these articles A,  in a sound matter of fact scientifical way, just come up with some "free" market propaganda, i.e. not valid from a scientifical perspective.

Furthermore "free" marketers/"anarcho"capitalists use the outdated state-concept of Max Weber, and this is not valid from anarchist perspective. More about Max Weber's outdated definitions of state and anarchy, and the modern definitions, see http://www.anarchy.no/begreper.html . Remember the anarchist concept of State vs anarchy, see below.

1. Anarchy and anarchism mean "system and management without ruler(s), i.e. co-operation without repression, tyranny and slavery".

Briefly defined anarchy and anarchism are coordination on equal footing, without superiors and subordinates, i.e. horizontal organization and co-operation without coercion. This means practically or ideally, i.e. ordinary vs perfect horizontal organization respectively. Thus, anarchy and anarchism mean real democracy, economical and political/administrative, in private and public sector.

Anarchies are systems with significantly small rank and income differences, plus efficiency, i.e. significantly horizontally organized.

2. Briefly defined State/authority/government in a broad societal meaning is systems with significantly large rank and/or income differences and inefficient, i.e. significantly vertically organized.

(This is opposed to Max Weber's definition. The crucial point is horizontal vs vertical organization, not whether there are one or several law and order agencies in a local area. The article "Anarchism vs "anarcho"-capitalist "law and order" by H. Fagerhus at http://www.anarchy.no/andebate.html, shows clearly that "anarcho"-capitalist "law and order" will function as a state as defined in 2. )

I am for anarchy and anarchism as defined in 1, and against State/authority/government as defined in 2.

"Free" marketers, "anarcho"capitalists, right "libertarians" are statists as defined in 2. Their system is, or will very likely end up in, economical plutarchy, i.e. not anarchy. That is how a 100% unregulated market will work, seen in a dynamic perspective.

I am not "lacking a handle on economic principles". This is not true, see A SHORT NOTE ON THE GENERAL THEORY OF ANARCHIST ECONOMICS at http://www.anarchy.no/aneco1.html .

I am not against a private sector (markets), there is however also a need for a public sector, horizontally organized in anarchy.

Society is public sector plus private sector, both significantly horizontally organized in an anarchy. What is public? Latin, publicus, from populus, people. Public may a) be state/government or b) horizontally organized, without ruler(s) and ruled, i.e. for b): 1. It means of, belonging, concerning, or pertaining to the people of a community, as a whole, say, an anarchist commune as Kropotkin defined it. 2. open to common use; for the use or benefit of all, as a public park or public road, etc. 3. known by, or open to the knowledge of all or most of the people; as, "he/she will make this information public". Public is opposed to private. A market is here defined as a social arrangement that allows buyers and sellers to discover information and carry out a voluntary exchange of goods or services. The private sector is based on markets, plus of course family life. Where there are no markets and no family life, we have a public sector. Furthermore, the private sector must be horizontally organized to be anarchist. That is based on possession, not property, i.e. theft, based on free contracts, not slave contracts, in general be without authoritarian market failures. This indicates some market regulations, from within, selfregulation, decided by the people really concerned, and not imposed by a government, to do away with authoritarian market failures in general. Thus 100% unregulated markets are at odds with anarchism.

A keyword in the organizing of an anarchist public sector is participatory democracy. Participatory democracy is per definition a collective decision making prosess. The general idea, for society close to the anarchist ideal, is that the people really concerned of a case should be the ones that decide, in a horizontal way, alone in individual matters, two toghether in bilateral matters, three toghether in trilateral matters, etc. Thus freedom etc. have both individual and collective aspects.

A bit simplified: Society is private sector plus public sector, both significantly horizontally organized in anarchy.

* Real democracy means one vote per head, participatory, plus anarchist basic rights that secure that the majority cannot decide that the minority must slave for them one way or the other, or worse. Thus the case that the majority "two wolves" decide that the minority "lamb" should be dinner, or similar is avoided. The anarchist rights can be brought for the anarchist law and order system, in case of disputes.

In some cases, say, at which side on the road we should drive, right or left, simple majority > 50% is ok. In other cases general consent - a lot for, and no-one against, is necessary. In some cases 2/3 or 3/4 majority is ok. As for private sector, based on markets, there is one dollar (or labor notes credit) one vote, and it is real democratic, anarchist, only if the income-distribution is significantly horizontally organized (and the economy is efficient). If the income-distribution is significally hierarchical it is economical plutarchy, not anarchy/ism. As for public sector, it will be organized according to *.

Thus anarchy is real democracy, in both private and public sector. From http://www.anarchy.no/a_e_p_m.html . A free market, i.e. a true free market, not a "free" market, is autonomous and socialist, without plutarchy economical and/or political administrative, i.e. with free contracts, not slave contracts, in short anarchistic.

---

Freedom, efficiency, fairness and other anarchist principles

by A. Quist 16.06.2008

A. Anarchist ideal and principles 

Anarchist ideal and principles: The aim is more anarchist systems, i.e. a movement towards more human rights and the best of the ideals of the French revolution, fairness and efficiency, less rank and income differences. The word anarchy origins from greek. The prefix an means negation of, as in anaerobe vs aerobe; and arch means superior, i.e. in contrast to subordinates, as in archbishop. Anarchy, anarchism, anarchist, etc. are alternatives to, and the opposite of, different forms of superior and subordinate positions, non economic and economically: Political/administrative rank and economic/income hierarchies broadly defined and in real terms, i.e. respectively (a) statism and (b) capitalism (economical plutarchy). 

1. Anarchy and anarchism mean "system and management without ruler(s), i.e. co-operation without repression, tyranny and slavery".

Briefly defined anarchy and anarchism are coordination on equal footing, without superiors and subordinates, i.e. horizontal organization and co-operation without coercion. This means practically or ideally, i.e. ordinary vs perfect horizontal organization respectively. Thus, anarchy and anarchism mean real democracy, economical and political/administrative, in private and public sector.

Anarchies are systems with significantly small rank and income differences, plus efficiency, i.e. significantly horizontally organized.

2. Briefly defined State/authority/government/archy in a broad societal meaning is systems with significantly large rank and/or income differences and inefficient, i.e. significantly vertically organized.

(This is opposed to Max Weber's definition. The crucial point is horizontal vs vertical organization, not whether there are one or several law and order agencies in a local area. More about Max Weber's outdated definitions of state and anarchy, and the modern definitions, see http://www.anarchy.no/begreper.html . The article "Anarchism vs "anarcho"-capitalist "law and order" by H. Fagerhus at http://www.anarchy.no/andebate.html, shows clearly that "anarcho"-capitalist "law and order" will function as a state as defined in 2. )

We are for anarchy and anarchism as defined in 1, and against State/authority/government/archy as defined in 2..

* Other basic principles of anarchism are: The negation of authority and all of its power, hierarchies and juridical laws. Freedom, equality, solidarity, social justice, free contract, free initiative, atheism, antimilitarism, internationalism, decentralism, autonomy and federalism, self management and 'comunismo libertario', i.e. not communism, but libertarian communalism - from each according to ability - to each according to needs. These concepts and principles should be considered all in all, not partially. [ NB! In general these principles should be interpreted consistent with the axiomatic principles (1) - (10) defining anarchy and anarchism and other -isms see http://www.anarchy.no/anarchism.html.]

* Thus: Freedom, i.e. free people, freedom without damaging the freedom of other people. Federalism without autonomy is not anarchist. Social justice means a) anarchist law and court systems, compatible with the negation of hierarchy, etc., i.e. alternatives to authoritarian juridical laws; and b) antimilitarist corps broadly defined, sufficiently strong to keep order and keep up the balances of strength, as well as stop militarism, intra- and internationally. Generally speaking, antimilitarism is not pacifism...

* These concepts and principles seen all in all, reflect different aspects of autonomy broadly defined, and socialism, as negations of statism and capitalism respectively.

The Anarchist International (AI) has no blueprint for anarchism, just working hypothesis. Freedom is an important principle. Freedom allowing for harming other people's freedom, is not anarchist. AI's anarchisms are based on principles freely accepted. To say that AI's anarchisms are a centrally planned state or similar is totally wrong. A horizontally organized public sector is not at odds with anarchism. It is a form of selfregulation, not based on an outside authority. Voluntarely accepted.

If prices approximately are set to social marginal costs , not average cost, the efficiency principle (Pareto optimality) is approximately reached. This is possible. And it will be done in a society based on AI-members. The principle of efficiency for the anarchist ideal is one among several decided by AI, see above. In a society based on AI-members it will come into effect as much as possible. Other people may have other principles, but I doubt they will be as anarchist. There are no "arbitrary rules of efficiency",  efficiency is one of several principles for the anarchist ideal, and should be implemented as much as possible, together with the other principles.

Efficient pricing, approximately pricing at marginal cost, is not so difficult to achieve. If average cost is above the marginal cost, the deficit shold be paid via social subscription, decided by the people really concerned, directly without authority. See below.

If the principle of efficiency (Pareto-optimality) is not achieved it will be possible to make one richer or more happy, without harming others. Thus this should be done. And thus the principle of efficiency is a part of anarchism.

As mentioned, briefly defined anarchy and anarchism are coordination on equal footing, without superiors and subordinates, i.e. horizontal organization and co-operation without coercion. This means practically or ideally, i.e. ordinary vs perfect horizontal organization respectively. Thus, anarchy and anarchism mean real democracy, economical and political/administrative, in private and public sector.

A bit simplified: Society is private sector plus public sector, both significantly horizontally organized in anarchy.

** Real democracy means one vote per head, participatory, plus anarchist basic rights that secure that the majority cannot decide that the minority must slave for them one way or the other, or worse. Thus the case that the majority "two wolves" decide that the minority "lamb" should be dinner, or similar is avoided. The anarchist rights can be brought for the anarchist law and order system, in case of disputes.

In some cases, say, at which side on the road we should drive, right or left, simple majority > 50% is ok. In other cases general consent - a lot for, and no-one against, is necessary. In some cases 2/3 or 3/4 majority is ok.

As for private sector, based on markets, there is one dollar (or labor notes credit) one vote, and it is real democratic, anarchist, only if the income-distribution is significantly horizontally organized (and the economy is efficient). If the income-distribution is significally hierarchical it is economical plutarchy, not anarchy/ism

As for public sector, it will be organized according to **.

IIFOR, AI and I suggest both a horizontally organized public sector and a horizontally organized private sector, based on markets. Thus we are not opposed to markets, they should however be regulated a bit to avoid authoritarian market failures in general. I will only point to http://www.anarchy.no/aneco1.html and "Antimilitarism - an anarchist approach" http://www.anarchy.no/ija238.html , "Anarchism vs "anarcho"-capitalist "law and order"" by H. Fagerhus, "Anarchy vs narcotic-liberalism" by me, "Too little too late? Nations Agree on Steps to Revive Climate Treaty" by IIFOR, "Anarchism and borders" by me, "The freedom concept defined and related to anarchism etc." by me, ""Free" marketers and slave contracts" by me, "The logic of collective action and anarchism" by me, "Anarchism vs "free" markets/"anarcho"-capitalism" by me, ""Free" marketers/"anarcho"-capitalists are statists" by me, "Some thoughts on anarchism and law and order" by W. McCracken and PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS VS POSSESSION IN ANARCHIST LAW by P. Johansen, at http://www.anarchy.no/andebate.html .

These articles show clearly the significant authoritarian tendencies of the "free", 100% unregulated market, and that the markets need to be a bit regulated by a horizontally organized public sector, regulations from within decided by the people really concerned in a horizontal way, i.e. selfregulation, to avoid authoritarian market failures.

Nobody has explained how a 100% unregulated market will deal with these factual problems in an efficient way.

Financing the public sector - social subscription vs taxes: We are here first discussing the anarchist ideal. If the people, say in a commune, decide with general consent a social subscription to finance a horizontally organized public sector, then it is 100% voluntarely. Thus there is no taxation involved. General consent is that a lot are for, and no one is against. In an anarchy of a high degree all the members of the society are anarchists and they have developed a consensus culture based on negotiations and a will to come to an agreement. In the case where there is no general consent, the majority may decide a social subscription for their part only to finance the public sector. The minority must then as far as possible be denied the public goods and services. Also majority decision may sometimed be used, i.e. if the minorities interest is secured so that they will be better off, even if they are voted down. See the dialog about democracy at http://www.anarchy.no/a_e_p_m.html .

As mentioned, society is public sector plus private sector, both significantly horizontally organized in an anarchy. What is public? Latin, publicus, from populus, people. Public may a) be state/government or b) horizontally organized, without ruler(s) and ruled, i.e. for b): 1. It means of, belonging, concerning, or pertaining to the people of a community, as a whole, say, an anarchist commune as Kropotkin defined it. 2. open to common use; for the use or benefit of all, as a public park or public road, etc. 3. known by, or open to the knowledge of all or most of the people; as, "he/she will make this information public". Public is opposed to private. A market is here defined as a social arrangement that allows buyers and sellers to discover information and carry out a voluntary exchange of goods or services. The private sector is based on markets, plus of course family life. Where there are no markets and no family life, we have a public sector. Furthermore, the private sector must be horizontally organized to be anarchist. That is based on possession, not property, i.e. theft, based on free contracts, not slave contracts, in general be without authoritarian market failures. This indicates some market regulations, from within, selfregulation, decided by the people really concerned, and not imposed by a government, to do away with authoritarian market failures in general. Thus 100% unregulated markets are at odds with anarchism. A keyword in the organizing of an anarchist public sector is participatory democracy. Participatory democracy is per definition a collective decision making prosess, outside the market. The general idea, for society close to the anarchist ideal, is that the people really concerned of a case should be the ones that decide, in a horizontal way, alone in individual matters, two toghether in bilateral matters, three toghether in trilateral matters, etc. Thus freedom etc. have both individual and collective aspects. You may say "freedom does not allow or permit or condone or support or encourage the harming of other people's freedom," as if "freedom" is some kind of decision maker. Only people can however see to that this principle is fulfilled, and take measures against people that increase their freedom by harming others' freedom, i.e. ochlarchists/criminals.

To see to that freedom is without harming others freedom, dealing with ochlarchists/criminals etc., in an efficient way, a horizontally organized public sector with law and order should be used. The 100% unregulated market will not produce freedom without harming others freedom in an efficient way. How will you deal with ochlarchists within the framework of a 100% unregulated market - and thus only private sector?

B. Understanding freedom and crime in anarchy

A usual postulate from  "free" marketers, is that  "if some people think that the behavior of some other people is  harming them and should not persist, they will surely do something about  it, and thus attempt to preserve their freedom. Freedom means being free to  exercise one's natural rights to what is one's own. Freedom does not mean  being free to destroy the natural rights of others, that is, what is  theirs."

The anarchist criticism of this postulate is: First "natural rights" is not a clear concept, but an ambiguous concept, and certainly not an authority. Thus people must interpret rights and principles and come to an agreement by collective action to avoid chaos/ochlarchy with respect to how to preserve freedom, and not harming others' freedom. Secondly to preserve freedom should be done in an efficient way, and, say, the article

1. "Anarchism vs "anarcho"-capitalist "law and order"" by H. Fagerhus, at http://www.anarchy.no/andebate.html shows clearly that this is not fulfilled in a "free", 100% unregulated, market system or anything close.

2. To see to that freedom is without harming others freedom, dealing with ochlarchists/criminals etc., in an efficient way, a horizontally organized public sector with law and order should be used.

1. shows clearly that the claim that free markets cause the infringement of rights is not false. You cannot define away practical authoritarian market failures of a "free", 100% unregulated market, by introducing an utopian unrealistic definition of a "free" market. How can you bring about a system that does not have participants who are infringing rights, and is free? This can only be done in an efficient way via a horizontally organized public sector, based on selfregulation i.e. not a "free", 100% unregulated market. Criminals/ochlarchists lack relevant morality, that is a part of the problem. They think freedom for themselves based on harming others' freedom is more or less ok. I have never said freedom as such is bad, it is freedom for one or a group based on harming others' freedom that is bad.

But will the "free", 100% unragulated market ensure freedom in an efficient way? I think not, see 1. and 2. above. 

3. The 100% unregulated market will not produce freedom without harming others freedom in an efficient way.

It is not confusing, see 1. and 2. above. The statement 3. is correct.

4. "Free" marketers, supporters of a 100% unregulated market, are proposing a recipe for ochlarchy/chaos, see 1, they propose crime control from private actions alone, and that will not work anarchist, see 1. 

AI's, IIFOR's and my proposals for solutions to these problems, i.e. to do away with authoritarian market failures in general, are not based on the State or something similar, but on selfregulation via a horizontally organized public sector, see 1, 2, 3, and 4. A free market, i.e. a true free market, not a "free" market, is autonomous and socialist, without plutarchy economical and/or political administrative, i.e. with free contracts, not slave contracts, in short anarchistic.

---

Global warming and anarchism

by P. Green 19.06.2007

It is clear from the preponderance of evidence, from the vast majority of climate scientists (a number that is growing, not shrinking) that global warming is really happening and is caused by human activity. First, let us accept that global warming is real and created by human activity. That is the problem. And it is caused by statism and capitalism. The bottom line is that it is not inconsistent with being an anarchist to accept that global warming is real. The difference is how  to deal with it. Capitalism and statism will not solve the proble, only more anarchism, socialism and autonomy will work.  Global warming and its cause  provide the greatest opportunity for anarchist solutions to gain mainstream acceptance,  if only we took advantage. Accepting the reality of global warming and what if anything to do about it are two different things. We must fight the inherent statism and capitalism of the global warming debate  without abandoning the field of reason and pretending the problem doesn't exist. That just makes us look stupid and drives people away from us. From back in the mid 1800 in USA, when farmers were barred from suing factories polluting their crops, heavy industry have been able to externalize the costs of their pollution to the public - we can't sue and take advantage of tort damages. A great deal of environmental legislation looks good on paper, but has loopholes and exemption that often allow all kinds of pollutions that would not have been produced had the industries been held to account by tort.

One of the leading causes of global warming (and smog and general pollution) is car exhaust. Starting after WWII local councils and state\provincial government created zoning and building regulations to allow builders and developers to build more and cheaper housing. The builders, in order to make more money, pack the houses in more densely (while at the same time making the houses bigger). They get the councils to ok residential or business zoning in areas only, and pack the houses in. No public transit is run out or supported, because that cuts into profits. No mixed use is zoned (especially in the last 20 years) because that too is not as profitable as giant parking lots surrounded on 3 sides by big box stores. No sidewalks are built by developers in order again, to maximize profits. In the end we have far flung suburbs where walking is not only discouraged (no sidewalks) but is often impossible. To even do something simple as get a quart of milk, you must use a car. To go to work, you must use a car. People who previously could could live without a car at all, must own at least one. And now we live in a car culture. Look at Ontario - we live in suburbs created by municipal councils zoning and provincial regulations which favour money making for building developers rather than livability for people. And when the people complain and try to fight, the Ontario Municipal Board notoriously sides with the developers almost every time. We have regulations that create an artificial advantage for certain corporations that create a socially engineered lifestyle that creates the major global warming and pollution producing activities.

And who controls the government? Pollution etc are mainly caused by industry and the institution of private property (capitalism). If ordinary people controlled thing communally, direct democratic, do you really believe they would shit in their own water supply? This could be combined with real possession rights, then we could sue any company that so much as put a speck of crap on his land or in his water, in court, in front of a jury of peers capable of assessing tangible and punitive damages – just because we didn't want it there. Right now all we get to do is complain the to the gummint, the guys who set the "allowable" levels of pollution in the first place.

Regarding the struggle against manmade global warming, the eco-anarchists are in the forefront, and demand joint international cooperation to solve the problem.

---

Noam Chomsky on the relevance of anarcho-syndicalism and collectivist anarchism to modern society

by Anarchos Worker 20.06.2007

In "Notes on Anarchism," Noam Chomsky avers: "There have been many styles of thought and action that have been referred to as 'anarchist.' It would be hopeless to try to encompass all of these conflicting tendencies in some general theory or ideology. And even if we proceed to extract from the history of libertarian thought a living, evolving tradition... it remains difficult to formulate its doctrines as a specific and determinate theory of society, pertinent to the American context, especially given the diversification characteristic of the contemporary period. Anarchism, he asserts, "does not limit its aims to democratic control by producers over production, but seeks to abolish all forms of domination and hierarchy in every aspect of social and personal life, an unending struggle, since progress in achieving a more just society will lead to new insight and understanding of forms of oppression that may be concealed in traditional practice and consciousness." (Noam Chomsky, For Reasons of State ( London : Fontana , 1973), p.151. "The Soviet Union versus Socialism," in The Radical Papers, ed. Dimitros I. Roussopoulos (Montreal: Black Rose, 1987), p. 60.)

Hence, while certain conceptual tendencies and continuities are perceptible, these are rarely permitted to ossify into dogmatic or proscriptive determinism. This open, transformative capacity, apart from precluding a static definition, differentiates anarchism from all other ideologies, particularly Marxism. This is not a fortuitous comparison. Chomsky has in distinctive ways denounced the Marxist legacy, i.e. in the pungent "The Soviet Union versus Socialism." Noam Chomsky is perhaps rather traditional, a fact which may be partly due to the fact that he has refused the theorist designation, suggesting in an interview: "Let me just say I don't really regard myself as an anarchist thinker. I'm a derivative fellow traveller, let's say." (Noam Chomsky, Radical Priorities , ed., Carlos P. Otero ( Montreal : Black Rose, 1981), p. 247.) Interview conducted 1976.) This may seem to disqualify him from consideration as an anarchist thinker, but his inclusion remains significant basically because in a sense he represents the public face of anarchism in America . Due to his eminence in the field of linguistics and his exposures of the ideological and academic apologists for American imperialism, he probably constitutes the individual most readily identified as an anarchist thinker.

Perhaps the most sustained critique of Chomsky's anarchism, and particularly of his introduction to Daniel Guerin's Anarchism , has been undertaken by George Woodcock . The latter bluntly states: "I am doing neither Chomsky nor Guerin an injustice in stating that neither is an anarchist by any known criterion; they are both left-wing Marxists." (George Woodcock, "Chomsky's Anarchism," Freedom , 16 November 1974, p. 4.) He substantiates his contentions by showing that the components of Chomsky's ideas are derived from only one strand of anarchism: anarchosyndicalism, the strand which most closely approximates to Marxism. Woodcock's criticisms provide a useful departure point for an examination of Chomsky's libertarianism, but they in turn are written from a rather orthodox anarchocommunist position. Woodcock is overdoing it. Although Chomsky has some insignificant collectivist ideas, close to Marxism, he is not significantly over the line to Marxism. He is a collectivist anarchist, a modern thinker in the Bakuninist tradition. The extent of Chomsky's ideas becomes apparent through a comparison of his ideas with those of his peers.

In an interview editorially entitled "The Relevance of Anarcho-Syndicalism," Chomsky expounds his theory of anarchism at some length. The principal omission concerns the methods through which anarchy could be achieved, but these remain implicit in his statements. Chomsky is critical to anarchocommunism — which he defines in a way so it is relevant only to a pre-industrial contexts. But, "on the other hand there's another anarchist tradition that develops into anarcho-syndicalism which simply regarded anarchist ideas as the proper mode of organization for a highly complex advanced industrial society... " (Chomsky, Radical Priorities , p. 248.)

Rhetorically enquiring which strand remains relevant, he continues: " Well, I myself believe the latter, that is, I think that industrialization and the advance of technology raise possibilities for self-management over a broad scale that simply didn't exist in an earlier period. And that in fact this is precisely the rational mode for an advanced and complex industrial society, one in which workers will become masters of their own immediate affairs, that is in direction and control of the shop, but also can be in a position to make the major substantive decisions concerning the structure of the economy, concerning social institutions, concerning planning regionally and beyond .. A good deal could be automated. Much of the necessary work that is required to keep a decent level of social life going can be consigned to machines — at least in principle — which means humans can be free to undertake the kind of creative work which may not have been possible, objectively, in the early stages of the industrial revolution." (Ibid., pp. 248-9) In order to establish the viability of these ideas, he cites the example of the Spanish anarchists during the late 1930s, suggesting that their "large-scale anarchist revolution" was temporarily "successful": "That is, production continued effectively; workers in farms and factories proved quite capable of managing their affairs without coercion from above"( Ibid., pp. 246, 247).

---

Anarchism, ethics and social scientists

by Sasha 21.06.2007

Although the debate within the field of economical and political/administrative systems probably will never be resolved to everyone's satisfaction, the anarchist view that state power can never be ethically justified - even in its American representative majority-rule variant -  finds impressive support within academic philosophy (see, for example, Wolff, R. P. (1970): In defense of anarchism. New York: Harper). Anarchists agree that political arrangements such as the US Constitution, agreed upon by a small unrepresentative minority two centuries ago, can lay no ethical claim on individuals today. That  anarchists do in fact conform to the demands of their political state is a matter of practicality, not ethics, in much the same manner that a decision to hand over one's money to an armed mugger is often the wisest course of action.

The key point is that individuals are ethically bound only by decisions that they themselves participate in making, and anarchists consequently approve of decisionmaking procedures that move towards consensus and direct democratic decisions while allowing dissenters to preserve their autonomy. Social scientists who are interested in the nature of personal values, in ethical judgment, and in issues of freedom and authority and personal responsibility would find much in anarchism that is relevant to their concerns.

---

The road towards anarchy of a high degree

by D. Dorn 23.06.2007

The organization of the anarchist society of a high degree on a large scale can only be achieved gradually as material conditions permit, and as the people convince themselves of the benefits to be gained and as they gradually become psychologically accustomed to radical alterations in their way of life. Since anarchism of a high degree cannot be imposed, I assume the necessity for the coexistence of various economic and political/administrative forms, communist anarchist, collectivist anarchist, mutualist/social individualist anarchist, individualist  anarchist - on the condition that there will be no exploitation of others. I am confident that the convincing example of successful libertarian collective will  attract others into the orbit of the collectivity. For my part I do not  believe that there is "one" solution to the social problem, but a thousand different and changing solutions, in the same way as social existence is different in time and space.

---

Some thoughts on anarchism and law and order

by W. McCracken 25.06.2007

The political/administrative and economical ideas of anarchism propose that society can function peacefully in a spontaneous order without being directed by a central governing authority. The absence of government does not imply an absence of management, administration, and order. Without a central government, folks would organize themselves in consensual communities. Contractual communities and mutual aid societies would provide for the collective goods desired by the members, including the protection of possession rights, as opposed to property, i.e theft. A horizontally organized public sector will emerge. Also, individuals could hire protective agencies, just as businesses today hire guards and security services.

There is law and order in  anarchism of a high degree. Anarchist law can be derived by at least three sources. First, contracts establish rules and enforcement among the parties of a contract, including a community contract. Secondly, law evolves as cases are brought before judges, with a jury, following Tucker, who interpret previous law and apply concepts of justice to establish precedents that create new law . Third, an anarchist public sector, with law and order services, can be decided by the people really concerned, via general consent.

In an anarchist world, law and order would be established over a large territory by the association of communities with one another. They would form leagues and federations for mutual aid and wide-area services. There could be individuals and communities who do not wish to affiliate with the network, and they would co-exist so long as they were peaceful.

Anarchy of a high degree, i.e. orderly, can only come about via a social evolution. Now, the solid surface of the earth has been claimed by states. There are only two countries with an anarchy of low degree, i.e. Norway and Switzerland, plus the Anarchy of the oceans. There is nowhere to go other than the ocean to establish a new anarchist society of a high degree, and an anarchist ship would be vulnerable to being sunk by an enemy torpedo.

An anarchist society of a high degree today can be established in one of two ways. First, it would be possible for an organized anarchist movement to overthrow a government and then establish an anarchist social contract that would manage the territory voluntarily, a velvet revolution. Those who did not wish to affiliate would be free to be independent, but the contractual management would be armed and ready to defend itself against aggression. The danger of this method is that, as happened with the Soviet revolution, the revolutionaries could instead establish a new tyranny.

Second, and far better, there could be a movement to devolve the central government. Authority would first shift to local government. Public finance would shift from the central government to provinces, counties, and cities. Communities as well as individuals would then be free to secede from the governmental authority. If most folks remained within the greater association, it would provide a rather uniform rule of law and provide protection within the association as well as defense against external aggression.

The association of chaos with "anarchy" has now become ingrained in the social psyche. True anarchists need not give up the word, but we can popularize alternative expressions such as the "spontaneous order " and "management and administration by individual consent" to let people know that a peaceful and orderly alternative to statism and economical plutarchy/capitalism exists.

The natural human order is and will always be, as Henry George put it, "equality in association." That implies that each individual is individually sovereign, with no imposed authority over him that makes him an unequal slave. That implies the anarchism, i.e. orderly,  of management and administration by individual consent, ideally or practically.

Property is theft, according to Tucker and Proudhon (but possession is ok). Property will thus be punished according to this. "Under Anarchism all rules and laws will be little more than suggestions for the guidance of juries, and all disputes, whether about land or anything else, will be submitted to juries which will judge not only the facts, but the law, the justice of laws, its applicability to the given circumstances, and the penalty or damage to be inflicted because of its infraction. What better safeguard against rigidity could there be than this? "Machinery for altering" the law, indeed! Under Anarchism the law will be so flexible that it will shape itself to every emergency and need no alteration. And it will then be regarded as just in proportion to this flexibility, instead of as now in proportion to its rigidity."

Source: Property Under Anarchism. Excerpted from the book; Individual Liberty