<\/p>\n
(translation Nuria Rodr\u00edguez)
\nBarcelona, 23 June, 2011<\/p>\n
The contribution I can make is basically some working notes in relation to the activities of the last few months, which are about the type of struggle we have been constructing over the past few years and, on a practical level, on how to face up to the problems that we are encountering at this point.
\nWe believe that the struggle we have been participating in \u2013 for the defense of the Internet and sharing \u2013 has been crucial for arriving at the #15M movement.
\nCrucial at two levels.
\nFirstly for the maturity it has created, which cuts right across all layers of public opinion, both in terms of defending something that belongs to it and is in danger of being snatched away \u2013 the neutral Internet \u2013 , and secondly in terms of ethical ways of relating to others.<\/p>\n
It is clear that the Network of Networks is changing the history of humanity. It does more than just allow for rhizomic forms of counterinformation and self-organisation, and more than just leave economic and political powers bewildered by the end of the univocity of their messages \u2013 of their monologues \u2013 in the face of the real-time dissolution of the impunity of their decisions aimed at perpetrating power and their own interests. Rather, the people \u2013 through the Net and like the Net \u2013 are dialectically putting an end to the fragmentation of ideas of change and the endogamy of groups, setting up a new ethical system that recognises the merits and skills of each person and allows for their maturity and autonomy, and normalising forms of organisation that are based on decentralised power, the empowerment of the end user and the shared distribution of resources.<\/p>\n
Netiquette [1] enables and structures the behaviour of people in the group, providing an at least partial solution to one of the problems that we have always encountered in social movements: the psychological aspect, the personal fulfilment of each individual in the struggle. This aspect, which is often ignored, plays a particularly important role in destroying movements.<\/p>\n
Using the same medium, although for reasons that are partly different here than in Arab countries for example, public opinion has been getting ready for the re-evolution.
\nIt is not only possible when you reach rock bottom, it is not only desperation that makes it possible. It is also possible when we arm ourselves with tools that allow us to think and develop autonomy, ideas and intelligence.<\/p>\n
In our text for last year\u2019s FCForum, we tried to explain to our international activist comrades involved in the defense of the Internet that the way Spanish public opinion matured and evolved on the subject of the defense of the Internet and against the \u201cSinde Law\u201d on intellectual property was not simply anecdotal \u2013 on the contrary, it was the construction of something.
\nWe said that \u201cSpain (where sharing is legal and people fight on a mass scale to ensure that it remains so; where a small business can sue multinational entertainment corporations and win, stripping them (we hope) of the digital levy that is their main source of funding; where the outdated practices of royalties management societies and cultural industry lobbies have created a lucid awareness of the abuses that were being perpetrated and of the flaws in the legislation, and a public that is very knowledgaeble and active on subjects that are apparently technical and apparently not a question of life-and-death; where over 200,000 people sign the Manifesto in Defense of Fundamental Rights on the Internet and support actions against the new \u201cSinde\u201d copyright legislation, such as setting up Red Sostenible and \u201cSinde\u2019s List\u201d etc.; where 200,000 people interacted with D\u2019evolution Summit during the meeting of EU Ministers of Culture; and where an action led to the resignation of a minister in 2009 with the Molina P\u00edrate campaign…) should not be seen as an exception that is hanging in there but on the brink of extinction, but as leverage. As a spring board.\u201d
\nThey didn\u2019t pay much notice, and now they\u2019re astonished :-).<\/p>\n
The awareness of the need to defend the Internet has taken root, and together with the organisation of struggles through social networks, this process has been a training and empowerment ground and the fuse underlying the explosion of the #15M movement (which is naturally influenced and constituted by the convergence of many years of a very diverse range of struggles, as well as the possibility of massively and collectively sharing the frustration of being fed up, which we used to experience in isolation).<\/p>\n
Taking this as a starting premise, I want to look at how we have developed in this context by mentioning some basic \u201claws\u201d:<\/p>\n
Tempos<\/strong> And I would add a stage four: normalise the mainstream, offer ourselves up for cooptation, Spaces<\/strong> 2 \u2013 The work directed outwards is of two kinds: either as anonymous, viral presences, under control but innumerable, ungraspable, which everybody can adopt as their own; Finally, in these prosperous times, we dissolve, putting our skills at the service of collective decisions; we dissolve into the general assembly of the people which,with its extraordinary collective intelligence, never ceases to amazes us, even though has been theorised: when all is lost, a mature assembly, of people who have their own opinions and have been informed and counter-informed on the Net, free from dogmas of one tendency or another, an assembly of between 1000 and 4000 complete strangers, mysteriously does the right thing.<\/p>\n How<\/strong> We think that right now demands for reforms structured in a pragmatic and no ideological way are the only manner to deeply transform the current system; because the system is ready to face enemies, but it is not ready to have its own internal contradictions blown open. We should also learn to win. In these times of great victories, we can clearly see how difficult it is to accept them as such. Transformation always entail loss, even when change is possible, but that is no reason to avoid it. We have to be aware of it in order to free ourselves of nostalgia.<\/p>\n The dynamic that has destroyed great revolutionary experiments is an inner fear of the new; this is why we want our message to be coopted, and we want to claim a victory when it happens.<\/p>\n Perhaps what I\u2019m going to say next may appear to be a bit \u201cIcelandic\u201d, but if is an opinion I share with many people in the 15M movement. Because the accusation that hurts us most \u2013 given that it cuts off our communication with a large part of society \u2013 is not that we are violent, but that we\u2019re just a bunch of kids protesting, with no ideas and no ability to govern ourselves.<\/p>\n Of course the politicians who take some scraps of what we say do so badly, of course they do it for populist reasons, but they are being forced to do it because we have demanded it. Of course it\u2019s a joke payasada, but we should celebrate it as a victory, every time, because it proves that they are afraid of us, because, whether they like it or not, we equal votes, and for them losing votes means losing their job. Isn\u2019t that what we want, to fire them?<\/p>\n Our strength lies in sneaking doubts into their minds, nightmares, thoughts of justice that they would never have imagined themselves having. To rupture their psychic structure, their imperturbable calm. It is curious to see that those who reject this tactical option later ferveently defend protests against the retalladas, the cutbacks, as if that weren\u2019t the most reformist demand of all, and as if everything had been wonderful before the cutbacks.<\/p>\n This war is a language war<\/strong><\/p>\n The first thing that has to change is language, and the change must be based on profound self-criticism. We can no longer rejoice in the martyrdom of asking for the impossible; we must evolve beyond accepting a role as antagonists on the losing side. The very language that we use is incomprehensible so that we can claim to be misunderstood.<\/p>\n We have to be responsible for our actions. Because of the euphoria and then the strength that it gave us to see ourselves united in such a great multitude in the 15M movement, some people are now trying to impose particular aesthetics and language, dogmas that have been mentioned and repeated like mantras for many years now. It is understandable, these are words that we have fought for, and that we are very attached to, but they are overused and faded now. In fact, the massive consensus achieved through the 15M movement did not come from any of the words we have been repeating for years.<\/p>\n The new words are \u201cIceland\u201d, for example, and \u201cTime for Outrage!\u201d (Indignez-vous!), a small book that is weak on content but introduces a new, inclusive imaginary and a word that hasn\u2019t been exploited yet. What we have been defending for some time now already forms part of this wave, it goes without saying and we have to express it through new aesthetics and words, ones that are based on winning. We have to be present at all levels. We have to work on the implementation of direct democracy, but also dismantle the existing power from the inside, as well as its media and memetic image. We have to be tactical with words and actions. We have to conceive our actions for the real, specific results that they want to achieve, not for visceral reasons or reasons of abstract justice… We have been working like this since the time when Barcelona\u2019s civic by-laws were being introduced (2005). WHAT ARE THE MAIN URGENT NEEDS NOW, IN TERMS OF THE #GLOBALREVOLUTION<\/p>\n 1 – To create a \u201cfork\u201d between the \u201cIceland aesthetic\u201d and the \u201cGreek aesthetic\u201d so both of these can co-exist without clipping the wings of either. 2 – The time has come to show immediate results. We\u2019re working on it.<\/p>\n 3 – For all of this, it is necessary to generate economy: we need cash. If we don\u2019t free up time for political work within capitalism, they will win. Aside from this, we are studying microcredit and crowdfunding systems, so that they can shed their aura of poverty and charity and become real sources of self-funding within and against the capitalist system, on the level of something like \u201cventure anarchism\u201d, to paraphrase our comrade D. Kleiner, Telekommunisten.<\/p>\n
\nAs one of the DRY comrades put it, the idea is to:
\nmake people indignant first, then inform them, and then ensure the strategy catches on.
\nThe idea is to inflame you, not teach you, Jean Genet said.<\/p>\n
\nreveal the falseness of the cliches through irony and humour, not through dogma. We do not teach; we share and magnify shared perceptions.<\/p>\n
\n1 – Work that takes place out of the spotlight is carried out by groups that share common interests and collaborations on the Net.
\nWe prefer to give priority to a non-open, protected space \u2013 although networked with the Net \u2013 so that the intensity of the struggle can be faced in a psychologically healthy environment. Contrary to some recent claims, we are in a hurry. Our tempo is the tempo of history, not the tempo of individual psychology. To convince ourselves of this, we use a phrase by Andretti, Formula 1 racing driver, who says: \u201cIf everything seems to be under control you\u2019re not going fast enough.\u201d<\/p>\n
\nor else, as openly branded work by affinity groups or networked alliances. We participate in many of these \u201ctrademarks\u201d in the area of the struggle for digital rights, each with its own frameworks and complicities, which cover different targets: Xnet is more of a consultancy service; the oXcars is a show that rescues \u2013 or at least tries to \u2013 the artistic community from its role as serfs and as an excuse for the privatisation of knowledge and the destruction of Net neutrality. The oXcars are a practical example for normalising free culture at the mainstream level, a show that openly invites cooptation by the system and by any one who happens to be passing by; the FCFORUM, a serious and earnest international lobby, a Trojan horse in European ministries and commissions; and RedSOStenible, the Spanish lobby trademark…
\nTo name just a few. Nobody knows how many there are, how many or who we are, who is responsible, or what they will do, but they are a trademark in the light of day, you can interact with them and obtain good results.<\/p>\n
\nLately we have been saying:
\nbe radical, ask for the possible<\/strong>.
\nHere we come to an aspect that is violently confrontational with a sector \u2013 a small one, fortunately \u2013 of the 15M movement. If the reader will allow me a simplification that is somewhat exaggerated due to exasperation because of the number of hours we have spent on debating with it, the people who make up this sector are the people who we consider to be the real problem, Trolls aside, on one hand I\u2019m talking about the \u201cpure\u201d radicals who think that the system cannot be reformed \u2013 so far, so good \u2013 but also sabotage attempts to use reformist demands as a guerrilla form. And on the other hand, the \u201ccritical intellectuals\u201d who you don\u2019t see much at assemblies because they\u2019re busy rewriting history with texts of the \u201cWhat now? A Pacific 19-J demostration Destroys Revolutionary Potential\u201d variety.<\/p>\n
\nConfronting the system with an ontological impossibility \u201cdestroy yourself\u201d, determines its way of defending itself: to become your antagonist. If you force a closed system that is bunkered down in the defense of its privileges to \u201cimprove itself\u201d, the only possible way out that remains to it is desertion and escape. We all know that it is necessary to leave an exit open for the enemy if we want to win.<\/p>\n
\nWe don\u2019t know how to win. Those who exaggerate the confrontation cannot \u201cdo\u201d anything anymore because the confrontation is its only way of \u201cdoing\u201d. Now that we are winning, we need to abandon the trenches perspective and accept the freedom to mediate with our dependency without the need to destroy.<\/p>\n
\nIf in the space of only a month, politicians have already taken several steps in an effort to copy or apply our demands, we should be pleased and claim it as a victory.
\nWith VdeVivienda we didn\u2019t claim victory when the Minister Chac\u00f3n implemented the \u201cyouth funding\u201d scheme. True, it is difficult to claim something as disgraceful as this as a victory, but not doing so may be what demoralised and weakened us at the time.<\/p>\n
\nThe techniques of escrache are essential.<\/p>\n
\nIf we cannot be understood by the majority, we help society move towards \u201cfascistisation\u201d.<\/p>\n
\nPlease don\u2019t misunderstand me: words are one thing, ideas are another, and there can be excellent ideas but they can be expressed through synonyms, we could say, which ultimately have the same objective.<\/p>\n
\nWe\u2019re getting it wrong; we\u2019re not winning because of what we have always said, but because of what we have always defended. In other words, first comes the practical abolition of privileges, and then global justice. That\u2019s how 15M was born and this is its wave, whether we like it or not.<\/p>\n
\nThe old words only suggest defeat and division, and now is the time for victory and for infinite diversity with a few minimum common denominators. A global association of radical reformist egoists.<\/p>\n
\nIf you ask people to hate their way of life they will position themselves against you; if you share their hatred arising from the same frustrations, we will be invincible.
\nAs the Icelanders say in mundane terms, \u201coccupy the media so as to win over the people who watch TV\u201d.
\nDon\u2019t we want that mass consensus? What\u2019s wrong? Don\u2019t we want to mix with the people? If we use the language that the majority understand, we will naturally be using a language that has been absorbed by the system. So? What\u2019s the problem?
\nWhat people are asking for (and I include myself) is to understand the laws that govern us. People are starting to see that laws are accessible and quite surrealistic texts, written by mere mortals who are terrified of losing some of their privileges. This is the base of the great empowerment of the people that is taking place right now.
\nThey no longer respect the law, and I\u2019m not talking about the idea of the law, but the law-thing. They read laws and discuss them. They no longer delegate this operation to specialists.<\/p>\n
\nFor us, the main part of the game is to study the law, understand it, explain it in other words, make fun of it, hack it to render it useless, destroy its authority by replacing it with other positive channels that will ultimately be coopted with the bad taste and time-lag that characterises the system, clearing away whatever had been there previously and leaving a blank slate.<\/p>\n
\nWhat is proving most difficult these days is to fight against the deeply rooted idea that it is \u201cbetter to remain united\u201d when internal tension is bringing things to a standstill and when our real strength is actually the fact that we have a thousand faces and a thousand names.<\/p>\n
\nConservas, the cultural association that we have set up, as an \u201canomalous\u201d cultural institution, considers the cultural subsidies as an important contribution to the r-evolution, given that culture \u2013 as we understand it \u2013 is a fundamental ingredient of the r-evolution.
\nObviously, this has also brought well-being to its members, because as I said earlier, without the economic health of artivists, the r-evolution loses a lot of energy.
\nNow that there are no more cultural grants, we must re-direct the litany of the cultural sector that \u201cwe want more money for artists.\u201d The issue is not how society will feed artists, but rather where artists will get money from in order to take it to the r-evolution and society. <\/p>\n