Archive | Greece RSS for this section

Letter from Theofilos Mavropoulos

From Culmine (July 22, 2011):

Theofilos Mavropoulos was arrested two months ago after being wounded during an armed confrontation with two police officers (who also got their share) in northern Athens. He spent several weeks at Red Cross Hospital before being transferred to a prison hospital and then to A Wing at Korydallos Prison. Below is his first full-length open letter.

The rebel is a kamikazesomeone who simply won’t accept the fate the machine has dealt her. That’s how you seek a life worth living. Those who completely reject this society have already faced the risk of death head-on. The struggle against the existent is an armed farewell. War or suicide.

—People Collaborating to Achieve Negation (Toward the Outside)*

On May 18, 2011, a comrade and I accidentally bumped into a mobile police unit in the Pefki neighborhood. They wanted to stop us and we tried to run, but we got fouled up (a police officer pounced on my colleague and immobilized him while he was trying to escape). Thus, wanting to extricate ourselves, I made the choice—the political choice—of armed confrontation. Wanting to flee from democracy’s armed mercenaries, since we couldn’t allow ourselves to surrender without a fight, I myself decided to take that risk, giving my comrade—who was unarmed—a chance to escape. He did so successfully, using the police patrol car itself, but I was unable to because of my wounds.

The reason why my comrade and I didn’t stop for a police ID check was because we had consciously chosen revolutionary clandestinity—the final, obligatory choice of those who refuse to allow the “Law” to imprison them.

Being underground means living on the edge of a knife, making complicated choices, and assuming a high level of risk. “Legality” is therefore of obvious use to a revolutionary entity.

Nevertheless, for revolutionaries who reach the dilemma of “whether to surrender or not,” how easy or difficult it is to “sell your own skin” depends on your previous experience with disobedience. Like the case of the “robbers in black,” who just a few years ago chose freedom underground over arrest and imprisonment, and especially Simos Seisidis, who refused to stop for a random ID check and lost his leg to police gunfire. Examples like theirs, among others, fill all our hearts with pride and strength.

Right now, I define myself as yet another revolutionary anarchist political prisoner in the hands of the State. A State that, in view of the gestating possibility of social unrest, is tightening its hold on its subjects and directly or indirectly abolishing many of its democratic pretexts (doing away with telephone anonymity, requiring that citizenship papers be carried, putting prices on certain peoples’ heads, releasing photos of those in struggle and imprisoning some of them on the basis of completely insubstantial evidence, making it illegal to mask up, etc.)

However, these measures are incapable of intimidating the generalized war of conscience that is underway. A polymorphic war, here and now, continually developing toward the goal of demolishing the existent. A revolutionary war. Without a beginning, middle, or end, but with many fronts. From open public assemblies to fiercely combative marches, from armed guerrilla attacks to the little everyday occurrences that make us evolve on an individual and collective level.

But for the anarchist/antiauthoritarian movement to be effective against the methodical maneuvering of the enemy, is must not be divided. False friendships, personality conflicts, maliciousness, and especially tolerance and acceptance of such behaviors and attitudes have to be replaced by unity and continual rejuvenation within the anarchist/antiauthoritarian milieu. At the moment, of course taking into account attempts at an organized internationalization of subversive action from Latin America to Europe, that urgency is more necessary than ever.

Additionally, the fact that the number of political prisoners has quickly increased as of late leads us to several conclusions. Apart from the matter of our solidarity, which has depth and substance when it is interactive and attacking, we must stress the need for revolutionary forces to always be one step ahead of the enemy. Winning a war doesn’t just require will and certain essential abilities. It also requires strategy. When your adversary is moving her pawns, you should be moving yours as well.

The way each one decides to fight is an individual choice and responsibility. Accordingly, starting from the individual, it’s enough to simply collectivize the common desire to fight Power. Political stability certainly has its part, but it’s also important to attempt to subvert that stability in order to reach something better.

The spread of anarchist/antiauthoritarian ideas plays a key role. Intensifying it quantitatively as well as qualitatively is essential. Also, in war, losses are a statistical certainty. However, potential revolutionaries aren’t solely motivated by their undesirable origins in the lower social strata. The complex of capitalist relationships and perspectives so dominates everyone’s life that the “worst off” can be found within every social and economic class. When human life has become just another product on the shelves of the market and its marketing, what’s the point of talking about cheap or expensive products when anything and everything has its price? Among the impoverished and exploited classes, there will doubtless be sound revolutionaries, but there will also be submissives, plenty of submissives.

All of you watching your children happily enjoying themselves in playgrounds and schoolyards today shouldn’t be surprised when you see them forming revolutionary alliances or taking part in armed attacks on Capital and the State tomorrow.

Thus, with coherence and persistence, as well as inexhaustible fighting spirit, you can achieve many things. Degrees of reconciliation may be different, but the goal remains the same, whether it sprouts up at assemblies in university auditoriums or comes blasting from the barrel of a gun: REVOLUTION FIRST AND FOREVER.

My fingerprints were found at the apartment in Kallithea and the apartment in Nea Ionia in Volos. I can’t take historical and political responsibility for belonging to the Fire Cells Conspiracy revolutionary organization because we never created that organization’s political discourse together. I also had certain disagreements with that discourse. Therefore, I am very clearly stating that I was never a member of the Fire Cells Conspiracy revolutionary organization.

But in no instance did those disagreements obstruct the path we walked together. I and my comrades in the Fire Cells Conspiracy evolved side-by-side, learning from one another and then—now stronger—taking action from a revolutionary perspective for the cause of freedom.

For those reasons, I proudly declare that I was PRESENT at the apartments in Kallithea and Volos, and I was also present in the lives of the members of the Fire Cells Conspiracy.

Recognizing their revolutionary activity, I stand in solidarity with all the imprisoned members of the organization, and I send them my comradely greetings.

May the pamphlet The Sun Still Rises be the prelude to a new, more relentless, more destructive, and more unyielding cycle of attacks. Comrades, whatever the cost, we will keep our heads high.




—Theofilos Mavropoulos; July 18, 2011; A Wing; Korydallos Prison

*Translators’ Note: This quote comes from a pamphlet published by four of our Thessaloniki comrades (Sokratis Tzifkas, Dimitris Dimitsiadis, Haralambos Stylianidis, and Dimitris Fessas) during their brief period underground (October 2010–January 2011) before being arrested for the arson of several Public Power Corporation (DEI) vehicles.

First Fire Cells Conspiracy trial ends with severe sentences [UPDATED]

From Act for Freedom Now! (July 19, 2011) and Liberación Total (July 21, 2011):

The verdicts and sentences were announced today in the first Fire Cells Conspiracy trial (the so-called “Halandri case,” which began on January 19), and the end results are not good. The three-member Athens Felony Court imposed even longer sentences than those requested by the prosecutor. The breakdown is as follows:

Haris Hatzimichelakis: Guilty of forming and belonging to a terrorist organization, manufacturing and possessing three explosive devices, and causing explosions with those devices at the Ministry of Macedonia-Thrace, the home of former Interior Vice-Minister Panayiotis Hinofotis, and the home of PASOK ministers Louka Katseli and Gerasimos Arsenis. Sentenced to 25 years in prison out of a total combined sentence of 77 years.

Panayiotis Argyrou: Guilty of forming and belonging to a terrorist organization, manufacturing and possessing three explosive devices, and causing explosions with those devices at the Ministry of Macedonia-Thrace, the home of former Interior Vice-Minister Panayiotis Hinofotis, and the home of PASOK ministers Louka Katseli and Gerasimos Arsenis. Sentenced to 25 years in prison out of a total combined sentence of 77 years.

Giorgos Karagiannidis: Guilty of belonging to a terrorist organization, manufacturing and possessing the explosive device used at the home of former Interior Vice-Minister Panayiotis Hinofotis, and being an accomplice to the explosion at the home of PASOK ministers Louka Katseli and Gerasimos Arsenis. Sentenced to 20 years in prison out of a total combined sentence of 32 years.

Panayiotis Masouras: Guilty of belonging to a terrorist organization, manufacturing and possessing the explosive device used at the home of former Interior Vice-Minister Panayiotis Hinofotis, and being an accomplice to the explosion at the home of PASOK ministers Louka Katseli and Gerasimos Arsenis. Sentenced to 11 years and 6 months in prison out of a total combined sentence of 19 years. Submitted an application for a suspended sentence, which was unanimously rejected despite the prosecutor’s willingness to accept it.

Konstantina Karakatsani: Guilty of belonging to a terrorist organization, manufacturing and possessing the explosive device used at the home of former Interior Vice-Minister Panayiotis Hinofotis, and being an accomplice to the explosion at the home of PASOK ministers Louka Katseli and Gerasimos Arsenis. Sentenced to 11 years in prison out of a total combined sentence of 19 years. Submitted an application for a suspended sentence, which was unanimously rejected despite the prosecutor’s willingness to accept it.

Alexandros Mitrousias: Guilty of belonging to a terrorist organization, manufacturing and possessing the explosive device used at the home of former Interior Vice-Minister Panayiotis Hinofotis, and being an accomplice to the explosion at the home of PASOK ministers Louka Katseli and Gerasimos Arsenis. Sentenced to 11 years in prison out of a total combined sentence of 19 years. Refused to submit an application for a suspended sentence.

Manolis Yiospas: Guilty of three misdemeanors: two counts of robbery (stealing an official hospital stamp a Special Guard fines ledger) and one count of fraud (falsifying a student ID card). Sentenced to 2 years and 9 months in prison. Yiospas’ charges were based solely on objects found in his home, and had nothing whatsoever to do with the Fire Cells Conspiracy. The prosecutor initially requested that Yiospas be acquitted, and after the prison sentence was announced the prosecutor then proposed a three-year suspended sentence, which the court accepted.

Nikos Vogiatzakis: Acquitted of all charges due to lack of evidence.

Errikos Rallis: Acquitted of all charges due to lack of evidence.

Excluding Yiospas, these are the very first sentences ever handed down under the so-called “Antiterrorist Law 2.” It’s also important to note that the sentences apply to ethical/intellectual responsibility for the bombings in question, not physical responsibility. The actual physical perpetrators of the bombings are still considered to be unknown.

An extenuating circumstance in the sentences of Masouras, Karakatsani, Mitrousias, and Yiospas was that their “crimes” were commited before reaching the age of 21, and a further extenuating circumstance in Yiospas’s sentence was his “good behavior” during the six months he spent in prison, given that he didn’t release a single statement or open letter.

Our comrades’ friends and relatives, as well as their defense attorneys, were stunned by the severity of the sentences, especially considering the Court’s finding that most of the accused were only involved in the Fire Cells Conspiracy for the span of a few months.

We will fully update our comrades’ contact information as soon as it becomes available.

Fire Cells Conspiracy prisoner address update

From Act for Freedom Now! (July 15, 2011):

For correspondence and communication with the imprisoned members of the Fire Cells Conspiracy Revolutionary Organization, their updated postal addresses are as follows:

Christos Tsakalos
Grevena General Detention Facility
51 100 Grevena

Gerasimos Tsakalos
Domokos Prison
35 010 Domokos

Damiano Bolano
Domokos Prison
35 010 Domokos

Panayiotis Argyrou
Korydallos Judicial Prison
18 110 Korydallos

Haris Hatzimichelakis
Korydallos Judicial Prison
18 110 Korydallos

Giorgos Nikolopoulos
Komotini Judicial Prison
69 100 Komotini

Giorgos Polydoras
Corfu Closed Prison
49 100 Corfu

Olga Economidou
Eleonas–Thebes General Detention Facility
32 200 Thebes

Michalis Nikolopoulos
Trikala Closed Prison
42 100 Trikala

For improved, more direct communication, a general post office box will soon be set up, and its address will be published on Athens Indymedia.

Fire Cells Conspiracy: The Sun Still Rises

From Culmine (June 14, 2011):

May 30 saw the publication of The Sun Still Rises, a pamphlet containing a complete chronology of Fire Cells Conspiracy attacks and the following new text by the group:

The Sun Still Rises

Knowledge chooses its project,
each project is new and chooses its moments,
each moment is new, but simultaneously emerges from
the memory of all the moments that existed before

—The Interior of the Absolute

1. The Beginning

The Fire Cells Conspiracy revolutionary organization didn’t begin its activity from out of nowhere. It wasn’t as if a straight line had cut through space and time. It was a future crying out from the past. The Conspiracy comprised a collective synthesis, connecting the backgrounds and viewpoints of all who participated in it and drawing valuable conclusions from past experiences of subversive projects and attacks we took part in.

It represented our desire to take a step further, not to climb some ladder of informal hierarchy that fetishizes violence and its methods, but to simply advance, move forward, and explore new perspectives, making the shift from a “bunch of friends” to an organization, from the sporadic to the consistent, from the spontaneous to the strategic.

Along the way, we assumed a critical stance toward the past, but we never went out of our way to be hostile. We are anarchy’s misfits, born from its potent moments and gaping voids. Additionally, the goal of critique and self-critique is not to put an end to something, but just the opposite: it’s an aspiration to evolve something. The fact that we’re not going to elaborate a corresponding critical review right now doesn’t mean we’re afraid to recognize our mistakes. Rather, it’s because that kind of examination is better served by distance and cool nerves than by impulse.

During no phase of our brief, intense history did we lose our collective memory of the anarchist milieu we come from. We also feel we discovered something we have in common with comrades who began the struggle before us, engaged in their own battles, were arrested and imprisoned, but never lowered their heads. We discovered the unrepentant passion for revolution that connects histories and realities of struggle from different decades in a shared context of individual and collective liberation.

In that context, we forged our own alphabet. Speaking the language of direct action, we openly raised the issue of creating organized infrastructure. As anarchists, we often distance ourselves from the concept of organization because we equate it with hierarchy, roles, specialization, “you must,” and obligations. However, words acquire the meanings given by the people who use them. As the Fire Cells Conspiracy, we stormed into battle over the meaning of revolutionary anarchist organization.

2. The Path from Spark to Flame

From the very beginning, we rejected the idea of a centralist model and chose to start from the basis of individual initiatives that wanted to collectivize. What emerged during organizational meetings were issues of coherence, consistency, individual and collective responsibility, and direct action as a means of transforming our words into deeds. At group meetings, each comrade had the opportunity to propose a plan of attack, thereby opening up a debate on planning, timing, political analysis, and operational problems posed by a given target’s location. During these discussions, there was no guarantee that we would reach agreement. Opposing arguments sometimes developed into a powerful dialectic, especially regarding the strategy and prioritization of timing, and quite often there was more than one proposal, so we then had to choose which we were going to select and which we were going to keep in “storage” to be refined in the future. It was a process that allowed us to open our minds; broaden our horizons; learn from one another’s different experiences; vigorously defend our opinions; figure out how to recognize our mistakes; understand the concept of shaping something together; become conscious of the need for strategy; and—most important of all—create relationships not in the name of some “professional” revolutionary goal, but based on friendship, true comradeship, and real solidarity.

We love what we do because it contains our entire essence. Therefore, the “Conspiracy” isn’t just all of us together, it’s also each one of us apart. Even in cases when there wasn’t collective agreement on a particular action, we didn’t resort to “begging” from the prevailing democratic majority. Instead, the minority of comrades who insisted on carrying out the attack took the autonomous initiative to move forward with their choice. That happened in parallel with the rest of the collective, which supported them at specific times if necessary, naturally playing a part in our overall organization.

That’s why a number of communiqués were signed by groups (Nihilist Faction, Breath of Terror Commando, Terrorist Guerrilla Unit) that arose out of each separate initiative. During the second phase, after reaching agreement, whether as the entire collective or as a separate initiative, we planned the attack. Each one of us contributed our knowledge; information was culled from newspapers, magazines, and the Internet; the area where the action was to take place was reconnoitered and mapped; the approach to and withdrawal from the target was laid out (avoiding cameras and police checkpoints), including alternate routes in case something unexpected happened, and of course keeping in mind the eventuality of a confrontation with the pigs. There were also support groups, “hideouts,” ways of asking for help, etc. (In a future manual, we will analyze and explain our experiences, which are related to how we perceive what is going on while an attack is being carried out.)

During the third phase (which was never far removed from the initial proposal about target selection), we worked on the text of the communiqué. When a topic was suggested (for example, attacking the police), the comrade who made the proposal argued for its content. Then a discussion began, during which each person fleshed out the concept, expressed disagreements, pointed out problems, and offered other ways to approach the topic. As soon as the debate finished, no matter how many meetings were needed to finish it, the collective brought together the central themes of all the meetings and shaped the main axes around which the communiqué would be written. The writing of a communiqué on a specific topic was usually shared out among those who wanted the responsibility, and after it was written, we got together to read it and make corrections, additions, and final touches. If the communiqué was connected to a separate initiative, then the comrades involved in that separate initiative were responsible for writing it.

The same process held for our Thessaloniki comrades, and when we collaborated as the Athens-Thessaloniki Fire Cells Conspiracy, comrades from both cities coordinated those actions based on principles of mutual aid and comradeship.

3. “Everyone Does Everything”

Of course, we’re well aware of the dangers lurking within each collective project that aspires to call itself antiauthoritarian—the appearance of informal hegemony and the reproduction of corrupt behavior, of which we are enemies. We feel that the purpose of power is to divide. To eliminate the possibility of the emergence of any informal hierarchy within our group, we struck directly at the heart of specialization and roles as soon as they surfaced. We said: “Everyone does everything.” Everyone can learn and devise ways to steal cars and motorcycles, fabricate license plates, forge ID cards and official documents, expropriate goods and money, target-shoot, and use firearms and explosives.

Therefore, it was and continues to be important to us that the means and methods we use for our actions be straightforward and relatively simple to obtain and prepare, allowing them to spread and be used by anyone who decides to move toward the new urban guerrilla warfare. These include gasoline, jerry cans, camping gas canisters, and candles that can easily be obtained at a supermarket, but also improvised timing mechanisms that—after the appropriate “research” in technical manuals and guides available on the Internet, plus a little innovative imagination—anyone is capable of fabricating.

We certainly aren’t forgetting that, while “everyone does everything,” each person also has their own separate abilities and personal inclinations, and it would be a mistake to gloss over those differences. With desire and mutual understanding as our guide, each of us undertook to do what we felt most capable of. For example, if someone was a good driver or a skillful thief, or perhaps had a knack for writing, that didn’t mean their creative abilities would be suppressed in the name of some false collective homogeneity. It was up to each comrade to offer their abilities and methodologies to the other comrades without making a “sacrifice” of their own participation, and it was even better if that happened in the broadest possible way, going beyond the narrow context of the collective and facilitating access by the entirety of the antiauthoritarian current—for example, through the publication of practical guides like those released by some German comrades, which contain a number of different ways to make explosive devices.

Additionally, our actions never involved fixed, immutable roles. Without resorting to the cyclical rotation of tasks, which recall compulsory work hours, all the comrades took advantage of a common foundation that allowed them to be able to execute any task at any time during an attack. The process of improving your ability to use materials and techniques is naturally a continual process of self-education. Along those lines, we want to emphasize how crucial it is to simultaneously develop a group’s operational capacity as well as its revolutionary viewpoint. At no point should the level of sterile operational capacity intensify without a corresponding intensification of thought and discourse, and the same obviously holds true for the converse. We had no central committee to designate roles. There were only particular tasks within a specific planpositions that changed according to the desires of the comrades who took part.

4. Guerrillas for Life

We’ve always felt that an organization doesn’t necessarily have to be exclusive to the comrades who are part of it. Our action neither begins nor ends within the context of the group. The group is the means to revolution, not an end in itself. Because when the means become their own raison d’être, “diseases” begin to appear, like vanguardism, the armed party, and exclusive orthodox truth.

Through the Fire Cells Conspiracy, we say what we believe in, who we are, and what tendency we represent, but in no way do we say that someone has to precisely follow some so-called correct line or participate in our group in order to be recognized as a comrade.

Thus, we ourselves have also taken part in processes apart from the Conspiracy, like joining coordinated action networks, attending assemblies, participating in marches and demonstrations, supporting attacks and acts of sabotage, putting up posters, and painting slogans. But we never thought one thing was superior to another. That’s because the polymorphism of revolutionary war consists of an open and permanent commitment that has nothing to do with fetishized spectacle (embracing armed struggle as the only thing that matters) or accusatory fixations (insisting on the quantitative characteristic of “massiveness” as the criterion for revolutionary authenticity). On the contrary, we position ourselves as enemies directly against the “polymorphism” of café gossip, speeches in university auditoriums, leadership roles, followers, and all those conservative fossils of dogmatism and habit that act as parasites within the anarchist milieu, wanting only to control young comrades, sabotage them, and prevent them from creating their own autonomous evolutionary path through the revolutionary process.

We believe that the concept of the anarchist urban guerrilla isn’t a separate identity one assumes only while engaging in armed attack. Rather, we feel it’s a matter of merging each person’s private and public life in the context of total liberation. We aren’t anarchists only when we throw a Molotov at a riot police van, carry out expropriations, or plant an explosive device. We’re also anarchists when we talk to our friends, take care of our comrades, have fun, and fall in love.

We aren’t enlisted soldiers whose duty is revolution. We are guerrillas of pleasure who view the connection between rebellion and life as a prerequisite for taking action. We don’t believe in any “correct line” to follow. During the past two years, for example, new urban guerrilla groups frequently posed the issue of robberies and expropriations from the banking machinery as yet another attack on the system. Their communiqués and claims of responsibility are powerful propaganda for the rejection of work via holdups and robberies directed at the belly of the capitalist beastthe bankswith the goal being individual liberation from the eight-hour blackmail of wage-slavery on the one hand, and collective appropriation of and direct access to money for infrastructural needs and revolutionary projects on the other.

We are exiting the scene of urban guerrilla warfare’s past ethical fixations, which rarely took a public position on the issue of revolutionary bank robbery. We feel that there is now plenty of new urban guerrilla discourse and practice that opposes—in a clearly attacking way—the bosses’ work ethic as well as the predatory banking machinery, proposing armed expropriation as a liberatory act, and obviously not as a way to get rich.

Nevertheless, we don’t consider the expropriation of banks to be a prerequisite for someone’s participation in the new guerrilla war. There is one revolution, but there are thousands of ways in which one can take revolutionary action. Other comrades might choose to carry out collective expropriations from the temples of consumerism (supermarkets, shopping malls) in order to individually recover what’s been “stolen” and use those things to meet each person’s material needs, thereby avoiding having to say “good morning” to a boss or take orders from some superior. Still others might participate in grassroots unions, keeping their conscience honed—like a sharp knife—for the war that finally abolishes every form of work that enriches the bosses while impoverishing our dignity.

We feel the same way about voluntarily “disappearing” to go underground. The fetishization of illegalism doesn’t inspire us. We want everyone to act in accordance with their needs and desires. Each choice naturally has its own qualities and virtues as well as its disadvantages. It’s true that when a group voluntarily chooses to go underground (“disappearance” from the environment of family and friends, false papers, etc.), that certainly shields them from the eyes of the enemy. But at the same time, their social connection to the wider radical milieu is cut, and to a certain point they lose a sense of interaction. Of course, the same doesn’t apply when there are objective reasons for going underground (arrest warrants, a price on one’s head), in which case clandestinity is the attacking refuge of those caught in the crosshairs of the law. This creates a parallel need for the existence of support infrastructure, both among guerrilla groups themselves as well as within the wider antiauthoritarian milieu, that will “cover” the tracks of wanted comrades. Prerequisites would be a certain complicity and discretion, which concepts are frequently seen as “outdated” but in our opinion should once again be launched piercingly into battle. If comrades from a guerrilla group engage in regular above-ground interaction—participating in movement meetings and processes, taking part in debates, and creating projects with others that address shared concerns—then the hermetic nature of the guerrilla group should clearly be protected from open ears and big mouths. Therefore, it’s general attitude also must be one of discretion in order to circumvent the deafening exaggerations that can turn it into a “magnet” for bastards from antiterrorist squads and the police. Taking a page from our own self-critique, we must mention the fact that many of us behaved completely opposite to the above, which—along with the viciousness of certain conduct originating within the anarchist milieu—“guided” a number of police operations right to us. In any case, self-critique lays down solid ground from which to develop oneself and offer explanations, but the current text isn’t appropriate for that. We’ll return to it in the future.

5. The First Phase of the Conspiracy and the Proposal for the “New Conspiracy”

The guerrilla has finally escaped the pages of books dealing with decades past and taken to the streets with ferocity. Because the urban guerrilla doesn’t offer utopian freedom. She allows access to immediate freedom. Accordingly, each person begins to define herself and liberate herself from society’s passivity.

There is now noise everywhere—the marvelous noise of widespread destruction—as well as the requisite revolutionary discourse to follow bombings against targets that serve domination. A determined armada of anarchist groups is setting fire to tranquility in the middle of the night, groups with names that reflect the “menu” they offer the system (in Athens: Deviant Behavior for the Spread of Revolutionary Terrorism, Warriors from the Abyss/Terrorist Complicity, Revolutionary Conscience Combatants, Lambros Fountas Guerrilla Formation; in Thessaloniki: Chaos Warriors, Attacking Solidarity Cell, Arson Attack Cell, Schemers for Nighttime Disorder, Fire to the Borders Cell, Combative Conscience Cell, Revolutionary Solidarity Cell, etc.). Many of these groups are also experimenting with a new international liberatory project as accomplices in the alliance known as the International Revolutionary Front/Informal Anarchist Federation.

Those of us who have taken responsibility as members of the Fire Cells Conspiracy are not intimidated by the dozens of years in prison the courts have in store for us. To begin with, we are creating an active collective inside prison.

We know that, for us, the opening phase of the struggle has been completed. However, we also know that nothing is over. The Conspiracy will not remain disarmed. It will continue to be a valid commitment in prison, as well as an open proposal to the antagonistic sector of the metropolis.

The Fire Cells Conspiracy proved itself as a network of cells, just like its name suggests. Right now, we’re not attempting to go over its operational record. We simply want to clarify its political perspective.

We feel that committing to a new Conspiracy most closely approaches the essence of the word, so we are opening up that possibility by making a proposal for a new Conspiracy comprising a diffuse, invisible network of cells that have no reason to meet in person, yet through their actions and discourse recognize one another as comrades in the same political crime: the subversion of Law and Order. This Conspiracy would consist of individuals and cells that take action, whether autonomous or coordinated (through call-outs and communiqués), without needing to agree on every single position and specific reference point (e.g., nihilism, individualism). Instead, they would connect on the basis of mutual aid focused on three key points.

The first point we are proposing in this informal debate is agreement on the choice of direct action using any means capable of damaging enemy infrastructure. Without any hierarchization of methods of violence, comrades can choose from rocks to Kalashnikovs. However, direct action on its own is just another entry on the police blotter, so it should be accompanied by a corresponding communiqué from the given cell or individual claiming responsibility and explaining the reasons behind the attack, thus spreading revolutionary discourse. The pen and the pistol are made from the same metal. Here, let’s note that the Conspiracy of the period that is now over never dismissed any incendiary method in its arsenal. It would be disingenuous of us if some young comrade thought that using the name of a new “Conspiracy” was conditioned by the use of supposedly superior methods (e.g., explosives). The new urban guerrilla warfare depends much less on operational methods than it does on our decision to attack power.

The second key point of agreement is to wage war against the state while simultaneously engaging in a pointed critique of society. Since we are revolutionary anarchists, we don’t just talk about the misfortune caused by power and the ruling oligarchy. We also exercise a more comprehensive critique of the way in which the oppressed accept and propagate the promises of happiness and consumerism offered by their bosses.

The fact that we engage in struggle against the state doesn’t mean we blind ourselves to the diffuse complex of power that administers contemporary interpersonal relationships. Antiauthoritarian discourse frequently alters and generalizes a concept like the state, relieving the rest of the people who constitute society of their responsibility. In doing so, it creates a sterilized viewpoint that treats entire social sectors as revolutionary subjects, whether called proletariat or oppressed, without revealing the individual responsibility each one of us assumes in the enslavement of our lives.

The state is not a fortress. You won’t find any door that leads you to some kind of machine or engine that can be turned off by throwing a switch. The state is not a monster you can kill with a stake through the heart. It’s something quite different. We could compare it to a system: a network comprising thousands of machines and switches. This network doesn’t impose itself on society from above. It spreads throughout society from within. It even extends to the sphere of private life, reaching into and touching our emotions at a cellular level. It molds conscience and is molded by it. It connects and unites society, which in turn nourishes and sanctifies it in a continuous exchange of values and standards. In this game, there are no spectators. Each one of us plays an active role.

—Costas Pappas, No Going Back

The enemy can be found in every mouth that speaks the language of domination. It is not exclusive to one or another race or social class. It doesn’t just consist of rulers and the whole potbellied suit-and-tie dictatorship. It is also the proletarian who aspires to be a boss, the oppressed whose mouth spits nationalist poison, the immigrant who glorifies life in western civilization but behaves like a little dictator among his own people, the prisoner who rats out others to the guards, every mentality that welcomes power, and every conscience that tolerates it.

We don’t believe in an ideology of victimization in which the state takes all the blame. The great empires weren’t just built on oppression. They were also built on the consent of the applauding masses in the timeless Roman arenas of every dictator. To us, the revolutionary subject is each one who liberates herself from the obligations of the present, questions the dominant order of things, and takes part in the criminal quest for freedom.

As the first phase of the Conspiracy, we have no interest in representing anyone, and we don’t take action in the name of any class or as defenders of “oppressed society.” The subject is us, because each rebel is a revolutionary subject in a revolution that always speaks in the first person to ultimately build a genuine collective “we.”

The third key point of agreement in our proposal regarding the formation of a new Conspiracy is international revolutionary solidarity. In truth, our desire to apply all of ourselves to creating moments of attack on the world order may cost some of us our lives, with many of us winding up in prison. “We” doesn’t refer to the Conspiracy or any other organization. It refers to every insurgent, whether they are part of a guerrilla group or taking action individually on their path to freedom. As the first phase of the Conspiracy, our desire and our proposal to every new cell is that the full force of revolutionary solidarity be expressed—a solidarity that cries out through texts, armed actions, attacks, and sabotage to reach the ears of persecuted and imprisoned comrades, no matter how far away they may be.

The solidarity we’re talking about doesn’t require those showing solidarity to express absolute political identification with the accused. It is simply a shared acknowledgment that we are on the same side of the barricades and that we recognize one another in the struggle, like another knife stuck in power’s gut. We therefore also propose support for the Informal Anarchist Federation/International Revolutionary Front, so that it can function—as demonstrated by the Italian FAI comrades—as an engine of propulsion.

From this point on, any comrade who agrees (obviously without having to identify herself) with these three key points of the informal agreement we are proposing canif she wantsuse the name Fire Cells Conspiracy in connection with the autonomous cell she is part of. Just like the Dutch comrades who, without us knowing one another personally but within the framework of consistency between discourse and practice, attacked the infrastructure of domination (arson and cyber attacks against Rabobank) and claimed responsibility as the Fire Cells Conspiracy (Dutch Cell).

We feel that a network of such cells, devoid of centralized structure, will be capable of far exceeding the limits of individual plans while exploring the real possibilities of revolutionary coordination among autonomous minority structures. These structures—without knowing one another personally—will in turn be able to organize arson and bombing campaigns throughout Greece, but also on an international level, communicating through their claims of responsibility.

Since we live in suspicious times, we should clarify something. Actions claimed using the Fire Cells Conspiracy name that aren’t consistent with any of the points we’ve laid out and don’t take the necessary precautions to prevent “damage” to anything other than the target of the sabotage will definitely arouse our suspicion, given the likelihood that they will have been hatched by the state.

Returning to our proposal, “anonymity” with regard to personal contact will reinforce the closed nature of the autonomous cells, making it more difficult for the police to “compromise” them. Even the arrest of one entire cell that forms part of the new Conspiracy wouldn’t lead the persecuting authorities to the other cells, thereby avoiding the well-known domino effects that took place in our time.

In the past, the fact that that we first-phase comrades may not have been involved in certain incidents never stopped us from publicly expressing our support or our critique, and the same applies to the present if new comrades choose to use the organization’s name. Without needing to know one another, through the communiqués that accompany attacks we can begin an open debate on reflections and problems that, even if viewed through different lenses, are certainly focused on the same direction: revolution.

Consequently, we first-phase comrades are now assuming responsibility for the discourse we generate inside prison by signing as the Fire Cells Conspiracy, followed by our names.

The new “Conspiracy” will maintain and safeguard its customary independence, writing its own history of struggle. This significant continuation will surely connect the dots on the map of rebellion, sweeping them toward the final destination of revolution.

6. The Epilogue Has Yet to Be Written

Through our actions, we are propagating a revolution that touches us directly, while also contributing to the destruction of this bourgeois society. The goal is not just to tear down the idols of power, but to completely overturn current ideas about material pleasure and the hopes behind it.

We know our quest connects us to many other people around the world, and via this pamphlet we want to send them our warmest regards: the Fire Cells Conspiracy in the Netherlands; the FAI in Italy; the Práxedis G. Guerrero Autonomous Cells for Immediate Revolution and the ELF/ALF in Mexico; the ELF in Russia; the anarchists in Bristol, Argentina, and Turkey; the Autonome Gruppen in Germany; the September 8 Vengeance Commando in Chile; the comrades in Switzerland, Poland, Spain, and London; and everyone we’ve left out, wherever the rejection of this world is in bloom.

This text has no epilogue, because praxis will always continue to nourish and transform itself. We’re just making a quick stop, concluding with a few words someone once said:

It’s an astonishing moment when the attack on the world order is set in motion. Even at the very beginningwhich was almost imperceptiblewe already knew that very soon, no matter what happened, nothing would be the same as before. It’s a charge that starts slowly, quickens its pace, passes the point of no return, and irrevocably detonates what once seemed impregnableso solid and protected, yet nevertheless destined to fall, demolished by strife and disorder. . . . On this path of ours, many were killed or arrested, and some are still in enemy hands. Others strayed from the battle or were wounded, never to appear again. Still others lacked courage and retreated. But I must say that our group never wavered, even when it had to face the very heart of destruction.

Fire Cells Conspiracy: Gerasimos Tsakalos, Olga Economidou, Haris Hatzimichelakis, Christos Tsakalos, Giorgos Nikolopoulos, Michalis Nikolopoulos, Damiano Bolano, Panayiotis Argyrou, Giorgos Polydoras

Translators’ Note: Costas Pappas was a beloved anarchist comrade who died in a traffic accident four years ago. A selection of his writings was released posthumously as a pamphlet entitled No Going Back.

Letter from Rami Syrianos about political isolation at Ioannina Prison

From Culmine (June 21, 2011):

Rami Syrianos, arrested on January 31 and charged with robbing an auction in Thessaloniki, recently released the following letter:

Shortly after being transferred to Ioannina Prison, prison authorities began a process of selective censorship of the printed matter (books, pamphlets, printouts from the Internet, newspapers, fanzines) being sent to me. Their excuses were that it was “being done for the good of the prisoners” (who evidently shouldn’t be be exposed to such reading material), that “writings that defend terrorism can’t be allowed inside,” and other such imaginative notions, accompanied by demonstrations of Power (without which they would never be able to do what they’re doing) via statements like: “I administrate this prison, and if I feel like it, I won’t give you anything.”

After the application of some pressure, but thanks above all to the demonstration—which functioned as a catalyst—that some comrades held in front of the prison, the censorship regimen ended and I was able to receive printed matter without any problems. Until about a week ago, when the censorship began again, this time with the help of a “skeleton key”—a bureaucratic excuse about some order “from above” that supposedly prohibits so-called “street publications” and texts taken from blogs. When asked what “street publication” meant, they explained that it meant anything not sold at a newsstand for a fixed price. In other words, according to that definition, any publication, pamphlet, or newspaper with antiauthoritarian/subversive content is off-limits, since those materials go against the logic of commerce, basically circulate without any price, and obviously can’t be found at newsstands next to Cosmopolitan or Playboy.

I don’t know if prison warden E. Agapitou is acting on her own or if she is in fact following orders like she says, nor do I know what the reasons were for restarting the censorship at this particular time. What I am sure of is that the physical confinement behind these walls of those who choose to confront democratic barbarity and defend their dignity as human beings—which gets trampled on every day here in the cells of democracy—is not enough to satisfy the State mechanism’s thirst for revenge. The deprivation of the simplest everyday things after imprisonment, the endlessly repetitive sensory torture of the surroundings, and the isolation from one’s local milieu is not enough to make all these prisoners obedient. So democracy throws off its masks and uses every means at its disposal to send the cautionary message of its own force: humiliating body-cavity searches, disciplinary measures, constant transfers, censored correspondence, quantitative isolation in prisons that are hundreds of kilometers from where one lives, qualitative isolation in special wings, deliberate medical and pharmaceutical carelessness. The goal of these and dozens of other premeditated procedures is the total submission of the prisoner by methodically annihilating her—ethically, psychologically, and physically—and assimilating her as much as possible to the tortuous and vacuous routine of “penitentiary institutions,” where psychopharmacology and apathy prevail, crushing one’s very personality and finally lobotomizing all subversive thought.

I view my imprisonment as a consequence of my decision to truly apply my rejection of this world in practice, and as nothing more or less than another situation in which revolutionary struggle continues. In this situation, books, printed news, and correspondence must take the place of meetings, demonstrations, actions, and debates, which at one point were the doorways to relationships and political development. I therefore consider the unobstructed receipt of printed material vitally important, and I publicly declare—to the prison warden as well as any of her responsible (or not) superiors—that if this regimen of political isolation doesn’t cease, I will move on to whatever method I deem necessary to achieve my goal.

(Instead of a) P.S. The humiliations I am subjected to by prison functionaries seem trivially insignificant compared to what other fighters have endured in the clutches of bourgeois democracy. The clearest, most representative case of the barbarity and fury that Domination reserves for its enemies is that of Savvas Xeros. His path, from the moment of his arrest and beyond, quite plainly reveals the face of a democracy that, in its own words, “isn’t taking revenge.” The use of special psychoactive drugs during his interrogation while hospitalized and seriously wounded from an explosive device that detonated in his hands, the many years of solitary confinement in the so-called “white cells” of Korydallos, and the medical mistreatment and deprivation of medication he suffered have all resulted in numerous health problems, and he is in danger of going blind if he doesn’t urgently receive suitable specialized medical assistance. On June 6, the court will rule on his petition for a suspended sentence that would allow him to be hospitalized at a special clinic.

I send him a fighter’s greetings and my complete solidarity.

—Rami Syrianos; June 5, 2011; Ioannina Prison

Translators’ Note: Savvas Xeros was a member of the armed leftist group known as November 17. In the summer of 2002, a bomb exploded in his hands, and his arrest was the first in a series that put an end to November 17. His defense attorney has requested several times that Xeros’ sentence be suspended to allow for suitable hospitalization that might save the remnants of his health. In view of the June 6 hearing on the petition to suspend Xeros’ sentence, a number of leftist and anarchist groups (including the Fire Cells Conspiracy) as well as prisoners issued calls for solidarity. However, the court ultimately rejected the petition.


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

%d bloggers like this: