Our anti-national series of events under the name of „class struggle instead of fatherland!“ was arranged for over two months and should start on May 19 with the critique of capitalism.
The critique of state should follow on June 16 and the critique of nation should end the series on July 21. On the house-plenum of the Flora, however, two people who are part of the pro-Israel spectrum vetoed against our series. Usually, the veto is used in order to discuss things out until a consensus can be reached. But in this case, where the veto was put in only one week before the first event should take place, it certainly acts as a blocking minority and is supposed to sabotage our political work.
The reason for the veto was our (“Revolutionärer Aufbau Waterkant”) participation in an anti-national block at the Revolutionary 1st May demonstration in Hamburg. We were told that we had not delimited ourselves from the anti-imperialist group“Rote Aufbau Hamburg” sufficiently. Furthermore, a slogan that was handed out by our sister organization ( “Revolutionärer Aufbau Bremen) at the union demonstration on May 1st in Bremen was called antisemitic. Our critics weren’t even able to quote that particular slogan. Moreover, a so-called “Mackervorwurf” (an accusation of authoritarian and male connoted behavior) was set against us.
In the following we want to comment on those accusations and afterwards criticize some further absurdities. We feel forced to do so in order to explain why our series of events had to move to the rooms of the comrades of ATIK in the Bartelssstraße 21. Also, we want to preemptively counteract any aspersions that surely will be made against us.
1. Anti-national slogans and confused Anti-Germans
Our critics didn’t even know what was called at all. However, they were absolutely sure that we’re in charge of antisemitism. The slogan was “From Dersim to Gaza-City – whack the fucking occupiers”. This slogan is a representative for critique of Turkey (Dersim) and Israel (Gaza-City). They subject a territory (Northern Kurdistan/ Gaza, West Bank) and its residents to their sovereignty. They exclude them from their constitutive people and accordingly treat them brutally. The Turkish nationalism excludes the Kurds but claims their land for itself and enforces this nationalism through a massacre of the Kurds. The state of Israel lays claim to Gaza and the West Bank but has no interest in use of the people living in that areas. The resistance is mostly antisemitic and Islamist. Communists criticize that resistance as well as the state of Israel. Communist criticism doesn’t want a “better” or “fairer” authority on the territory, but rather the Soviet power of the workers and peasants.
The anti-Germans say that a communist critique of Israel would be antisemitic because one has to recognize the right to exist of Israel as a shelter for the Jews to protect them from antisemitism. That is absurd. Communist criticism is always a critique of state, nation and ideologies which includes antisemitism. When the communist criticism would be in practice, it would mean that the theory becomes a material force once it seizes the masses and would be powerful enough to destroy Hamas, Fatah, Islamists and the state of Israel. Also it would be able to defend itself against the world-wide imperialism and could prevent the realization of Iranian antisemitism.
The revolution is no party, no university lecture and no dancing demonstration. The revolution is a lengthy, revolutionary war of the workers and the peasants against the national state, all counter-revolutionists and imperialistic interventions. This requires the overcoming of nationalism, sexism, racism and, likewise, antisemitism by huge parts of the masses. Otherwise there won’t be a revolutionary war. At the end of this war the Soviet power of the workers and peasants will arise. Anti-Germans, on the other hand, anticipate a fictional scenario in which a communist revolution in Israel would lead to a repetition of the holocaust. That proves that they never had a closer look at the theory of revolution.
Anti-Germans consider it as strange that of all things Isreal is a matter of debate. That is not a proof of antisemitism, it only proves that anti-Germans never talked to the migrant youth. In our work in the working-class neighborhoods in Hamburg and Bremen we have to deal with Islamists and Turkish-nationalists who want to spread their antisemitic ideas. They want to modify a dissatisfaction with the treatment of Palestinians through the state of Israel into a justification of the Jihad or the Turkish striving for regional power. Israel is a huge topic in the working-class neighborhoods and therefore we have to position ourselves. As a result we are concerned with the antisemitic critique of Israel, the reason of its state and the disastrous mistakes of the Palestinian resistance. The slogan captures the treatment of Palestinians and Kurds and disgraces the double standards of antisemitic critique by Turkish-nationalists. Furthermore we fight for a society liberated from exploitation and oppression. The necessary revolution includes Israel.
We criticize antisemitism and nationalism, which also includes Turkey and Israel. The reply to our explanation was, nevertheless, that we are liars and that we want to wipe out all Jews secretly. We would say things that wouldn’t sound antisemitic but our critics would know better.
2. The accusation of authoritarian and male connoted behavior
We – and especially our comrades from Bremen – were accused of acting authoritarian without further explanation. The authoritarian and excluding behavior is a problem in the society and in the left subculture and is used for self-expression. It can be so deeply grounded that not even a reflection of it can erase the problem easily. The only reasonable social intercourse with that kind of problem can be a practice of criticism and self-criticism. It is necessary to fight against the oppression of women in the own subculture with a collective critique of the collective and individual practice, assuming a shared critique of the patriarchate. We told our critics that we do so, internal and in public. In March a lecture was delivered in Bremen that criticized the gender relation. We offer a workshop of the critique of masculinity this weekend at a fantifa congress. We got no reaction to our explanations.
3. Demarcation of “Roter Aufbau Hamburg” (ex-Rote Szene Hamburg/ RSH)
The “Roter Aufbau Hamburg” (RAH) is a gathering point for everyone who defines himself/herself as somehow anti-imperialistic. Everyone who is interested in the dissents between the RAH and us is warmly welcomed to attend on our events, to discuss with us and to read our publications.
We took part on the Revolutionary 1st May demonstration in Hamburg because we wanted to reach the present and angry youth with our arguments. Now we’re accused of not delimiting sufficiently from the RAH. We organized an independent block under the name of our anti-national slogan „class struggle instead of fatherland!“. Our block was underlined by our own transparents. Thereby we showed a contrast of content. We wanted to create a closed and well-fortified demonstration. They stood in front of the loudspeakers, our block was placed behind. It was no alternative to enlarge the distance even more, in order to make sure no damage was done to the militant power of the demonstration. We have critique of the RAH but the safety of the demonstration was more important to us than a need for separation.
4. The veto-principle: The dictatorship of the minority
In principle the idea of discussing everything until the very end is a good thing to avoid votings and reach an argumentative consensus. In this case the veto-principle was torn into a dictatorship of the minority. Huge parts of the plenum considered the critique of us as instrumental. Arguments were claimed (and were delivered) but they were ignored. Baseless accusations were made and our critics switched between them back and forth. The intention wasn’t clarification, they intended to damage our political work what became pretty obvious when one of our critics said on last week’s plenum, with a grin on his face, the discussion could be continued in future. Of course he knew that our first event was planned for the day after the next plenum. Someone else reassured us honestly that the veto-principle is intended to discuss things out and not to sabotage our events. The grinning critic only shrugged and made it finally completely obvious that it doesn’t even matters what we say. He was on that plenum to sabotage us no matter what. The same guy claimed for arguments and asserted afterwards that we would be liars.
We said that we worked hard for money to pay for the construction site in summer. That we risked our freedom to defend the Flora. That we have always been solidary. And that we are now stabbed in the back. Thereupon, we were told not to be tear-jerking.
At least the comrades of ATIK offered their rooms for our series of events. Fortunately, the events can take place on the same days, only 150m away from the Flora in the Bartelssstraße 21
Thanks to the comrades that tried to prevent the sabotage!
Thanks to the comrades of ATIK who made it possible that three months of work weren’t for nothing!