Mixed, personal experience and politics, but the truth!

---

The Minister of Infrastructure and Transport must resign immediately.

He cried but he doesn't resigned.

Normally, the Mitsotakis government must resign, after all, elections will be held shortly, so there is no question of "institutional disruption". Just as the counterpart to the then tragic event in Mati of Attica, when people were burned alive, Tsipras's minister should resigned immediately and his government should also resigned.

Does all this sound "romantic"?

Too "populist" or even anarcho-communist? I don't care.

These people who all day have the possibility of direct and dominant supervision of critical material strategic structures, critical also for the safety of citizens, have in their hands information and files, powers, general supervision capabilities, they are not forced to run to make 1000 euros like me at 56 years of age, they have not been in front of courts and auditors and prosecutions when I was pursued by financial criminals when I exposed them.

They were selling disability pensions in a mafia way, through a mafia ring of fascist parastatal far-rights, and I denounced them openly and instead of them being prosecuted, I was administratively prosecuted for "insulting"!!

Then I was transferred, by the rotten right-wingers of the New Democracy who were in power at the time, to another branch of the insurance fund where I worked where 30,000,000 euros were embezzled by right-wing and "socialist" employees together and when they were arrested by the financial police the then another government tried to incriminate all workers there, to hide the responsibility of the state, through mental terrorism, threats and digital harassment, with the result that a colleague, innocent, was sent to the mental hospital and the rest of us are on the verge of mental illness!

Finally the light shone, and only the guilty went to prison, but...but...tell me!

I and all my colleagues, my fellow citizens, my friends, etc. should now be tolerant of all these lumpen state or party or ministerial bastards, thinking "institutional" and "cold" for ministers and prime ministers?

Will we be "populists" if we at least ask for their impeachment? or if we ask for no more State, not "no more public sector", no dear liberals, but no more State, then we will be irrational and populist?

Today all the people's bosses, right and pseudo-left should be ashamed, and we must start to ask to take the power of everything into our own hands, into our own humble hands, in modern terms, yes, we don't need all-wise modernizers to teach us how does a mondern technical production control work!

We know the way! young people even more, they are knowledgeable about modern digital control techniques, why do we need the bosses/masters? why do we need the experts? why do we want the dreaded government? why do we want the boss and the private capitalists? do we need the banks? 

No.

 

Ιωάννης Τζανάκος

 

 

For the railway tragedy in Greece.

For anyone who is coolminded, not cynical.

The first conclusions.

1. There are contemporary technical safety valves for the traffic of trains that are already applied in many countries in the damned abominable imperialist European Union, which are not applied to the Greek railway network, although they have - if I'm not mistaken - already been approved and probably already bought (?) here in Greece by the competent private company, which the competent ministry must control.

2. The workers' union has already warned about the lack of security stressing the importance of the lack of staff. This factor may not be enough to explain the whole problem but the union is telling an essential truth.

3. It is very possible that a significant part of the responsibility belongs to one or two people, responsible for the regulation of traffic, but this does not absolve the state, the government and the private company. In the final analysis, the state, the private company, the minister, etc., were and remain responsible as the co-responsible superior authority for this, that is, for the unimaginable apathy and immorality in carrying out a task of supervision critical to the safety of citizens.

4. Privatization as a general solution for all diseases and all nonsense has been over for years worldwide. Especially in Greece, however, and in countries where lumpen capitalism prevails, privatization is not only a non-solution to other problems, but can mean more lumpenization.

Neither state nor private sovereignty over the public economic good are solutions, or even panaceas, when what is called for is social conscience, democratic control and the assumption of responsibilities.

There are no magic solutions.

There are principles and values that are supposed to exist in practice, but do not exist in practice, and also there are principles and values that are not considered worthy of discussion but should be considered and implemented, such as the principle of institutionally enshrined Worker's discourse.

The workers have an opinion, a Reason, an experience, and they usually tell the truth about their work, but there is no social institution that gives this Reason a crucial and decisive status.

 

---

Για όποιον είναι ψύχραιμος, όχι κυνικός. Τα πρώτα συμπεράσματα.

1. Υπάρχουν συγχρόνου τεχνικής δικλείδες ασφαλείας για την κυκλοφορία των τραίνων που ήδη εφαρμόζονται σε πολλές χώρες στην καταραμένη αποτρόπαιη ιμπεριαλιστική Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση, οι όποιες δεν εφαρμόζονται στο ελληνικό σιδηροδρομικό δίκτυο, αν και έχουν -αν δεν κάνω λάθος- ήδη εγκριθεί και μάλλον ήδη αγοραστεί(;) εδώ στην Ελλάδα από την αρμόδια ιδιωτική εταιρεία, την οποία το αρμόδιο υπουργείο οφείλει να ελέγχει.

2. Το συνδικάτο των εργατών έχει ήδη προειδοποιήσει για την έλλειψη ασφάλειας τονίζοντας την σημασία τής έλλειψης προσωπικού. Μπορεί να μην φτάνει να εξηγήσει αυτός ο παράγοντας όλο το πρόβλημα αλλά το συνδικάτο λέει μια ουσιαστική αλήθεια.

3. Είναι πολύ πιθανό σημαντικό μέρος τής ευθύνης να ανήκει σε ένα ή δύο άτομα, αρμόδια για την ρύθμιση τής κυκλοφορίας, αλλά αυτό δεν αθωώνει το κράτος, την κυβέρνηση και την ιδιωτική εταιρεία. Σε τελική ανάλυση και για αυτό, δηλαδή για την αδιανόητη απάθεια και ανηθικότητα στην επιτέλεση ενός κρίσιμου για την ασφάλεια των πολιτών έργου εποπτείας, το κράτος, η ιδιωτική εταιρεία, ο υπουργός κ.λπ ήταν και παραμένουν υπεύθυνοι ως συνυπεύθυνη προϊστάμενη αρχή.

4. Η ιδιωτικοποίηση ως γενική λύση για πάσα νόσο και πάσα μαλακία μας τελείωσε, εδώ και χρόνια παγκοσμίως. Ειδικά στην Ελλάδα όμως και σε χώρες που επικρατεί ένας λούμπεν καπιταλισμός η ιδιωτικοποίηση όχι μόνον είναι μη λύση άλλων προβλημάτων αλλά μπορεί να σημαίνει περισσότερη λουμπενοποίηση. Ούτε η κρατική ούτε η ιδιωτική κυριαρχία στο δημόσιο οικονομικό αγαθό αποτελούν λύσεις, ή έστω πανάκειες, όταν το ζητούμενο είναι η κοινωνική συνείδηση, ο δημοκρατικός έλεγχος και η ανάληψη ευθυνών. Δεν υπάρχουν μαγικές λύσεις. Υπάρχουν αρχές και αξίες που υποτίθεται υφίστανται στην πράξη, αλλά δεν υφίστανται στην πράξη, και επίσης υπάρχουν αρχές και αξίες που δεν θεωρούνται άξιες λόγου αλλά θα έπρεπε να θεωρούνται και να υλοποιούνται, όπως η αρχή τού θεσμικά κατοχυρωμένου εργατικού Λόγου. Οι εργάτες έχουν άποψη, Λόγο, εμπειρία, και συνήθως λένε την αλήθεια για τη δουλειά τους, αλλά δεν υπάρχει κοινωνικός θεσμός που να δίνει σε αυτόν τον Λόγο υπόσταση καίρια και αποφασιστική.

--

 

The criminal negligence of an employee or supervisor in a production process that takes place under conditions of organizational dissolution, anachronism, and predatory privatization does exist as criminal negligence, but it is not allowed to become the pretext and false argument of all those who caused this with their policies the grid of unacceptable objective conditions.

I want to see now how it will react and how quickly the famous independent judiciary will react, and I also want to see how deep it will cast its judicial net.

If we again see acquittal by cover-up of predatory private companies, then we will ask the gentlemen of the liberal space:

Who and what gives rise to the populists in this country, but also everywhere?

The public sector trade unionists?

The Civil servants?

The workers?

Are you going to start the propaganda attack game again against all but the predatory private capitalist sector?

--

 

Η όποια εγκληματική αμέλεια ενός εργαζομένου ή επόπτη σε μια παραγωγική διαδικασία που συντελείται υπό συνθήκες οργανωτικής διάλυσης, αναχρονισμού, και ληστρικής ιδιωτικοποίησης, υπάρχει μεν ως εγκληματική αμέλεια, αλλά δεν επιτρέπεται να γίνεται η πρόφαση και το ψευδοεπιχείρημα όλων αυτών που με τις πολιτικές τους προκάλεσαν αυτό το πλέγμα των απαράδεκτων αντικειμενικών συνθηκών.

Θέλω να δω τώρα πως θα αντιδράσει και πόσο γρήγορα θα αντιδράσει η περίφημη ανεξάρτητη δικαιοσύνη, και θέλω να δω επίσης πόσο βαθιά θα ρίξει το δικαστικό της δίχτυ.

Αν δούμε πάλι αθώωση δια συγκάλυψης των λησταρχικών ιδιωτικών επιχειρήσεων, τότε θα ρωτήσουμε τούς κυρίους τού φιλελεύθερου χώρου:

Ποιος και τι γεννάει τους λαϊκιστές σε αυτή τη χώρα, αλλά και παντού;

Οι συνδικαλιστές τού δημοσίου;

Οι δημόσιοι υπάλληλοι;

Οι εργάτες;

Θα αρχίσετε πάλι το παιχνίδι τής προπαγανδιστικής επίθεσης εναντίον όλων πλην των αρπακτικών τού ιδιωτικού καπιταλιστικού τομέα;

--

 

We are not quick to judge, but tell me, how is it that ordinary workers are always right when they talk about the subject of their work?

Is that a coincidence too?

No.

Workers, even through their bureaucratic trade unionists, always tell the truth, warn, demand solutions that don't only concern their wages.

It is a lie what those who accuse workers and trade unionists of only being interested in money and positions are saying.

This is a distorted depiction of reality.

Ask the workers, the workers in a production process, finally, to find out what is going on there.

All this propaganda malice against workers, employees, especially the wider public sector, has blinded the society, and besides its other negative results is dangerous for the safety of the citizens.

--

 

Δεν κρίνουμε βιαστικά, αλλά πείτε μου, πως γίνεται και οι απλοί εργαζόμενοι έχουν πάντα δίκιο όταν μιλάνε για το αντικείμενο τής εργασίας τους;

Είναι σύμπτωση κι αυτό;

Όχι.

Οι εργαζόμενοι, ακόμα και μέσω των γραφειοκρατών συνδικαλιστών τους, λένε πάντα την αλήθεια, προειδοποιούν, απαιτούν λύσεις που δεν αφορούν μόνον το μισθό τους. Είναι ψέμα αυτό που λένε όσοι κατηγορούν τους εργαζόμενους και τους συνδικαλιστές ότι ενδιαφέρονται μόνο για τα λεφτά και τις θέσεις.

Πρόκειται για μια στρεβλή απεικόνιση τής πραγματικότητας.

Ρωτήστε τους εργαζομένους, τούς εργάτες σε μια παραγωγική διαδικασία, επιτέλους, για να μάθετε τι γίνεται εκεί.

Όλη αυτή η προπαγανδιστική κακοήθεια εναντίον των εργαζόμενων, εργατών, υπαλλήλων, ειδικά του ευρύτερου δημοσίου τομέα, έχει τυφλώσει τη κοινωνία, και πέραν των άλλων αρνητικών αποτελεσμάτων της είναι επικίνδυνη για την ασφάλεια των πολιτών.

--

 

For the railway tragedy in Greece.

I remember my German teacher, Joseph, a Bavarian philologist who knew ancient Greek perfectly (definitely better than me), modern Greek, Latin, and the Italian language.

When Joseph was living in Germany, he was a railway employee.

The railway and its degree of organization remains an indicator of the real development of the productive forces of a country.

When I was talking with Joseph about what a railway means, he explained to me in detail how difficult a job it is, how important is the organization, the detail, the complexity of the work of the railway networks, etc.

The highly educated and ultra-conservative (Bavarian he is!) German friend and teacher of mine loved his work, being a serious person, he loved Greece, both ancient and new, moreover he proved this, he left them all back to Germany and immigrated to Greece, but when the subject of the discussion it was the Greek railway, he told me emphatically that this is a "criminal organization".

--

 

Ιωάννης Τζανάκος

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Experimental texts about line.

Experimental texts about line (1). The "right-wing" version of the socialist transition. [Following in the experimental text (2), the "leftmost" version of the socialist transition].

Now, especially in this day and age, and from now on, there is something about the radical socialist libertarian movement, which has always been true, but in the past there were violations of it that had no immediate political consequences for the movement.

Now it has these effects.

What is this?

Democratic strategy is not only necessary for the proper replication and substantial success of any anti-capitalist effort, but is an immediate necessity for the very existence of radical socialism within the existing capitalist world.

That is, the anti-democratic, whether bureaucratic or sectarian (they seem more innocent, but they are not) ideological and practical logics, destroy this radical movement (for the ultimate prevaile of a classless society), by preventing it from even existing within of capitalism in mass and therefore essentially militant terms.

It is for me a huge, gigantic mistake what the whole of the radical intelligentsia is doing everywhere, that is, trying to go itself to some ideal direct-democratic or libertarian past, as a moment, a sperm, etc., because in this way it reproduces exactly those elements that were creating -through ellipticity them- this very impasse.

The reduction to this indeed containing positive elements but democratically elliptical ideological political practical past is unfortunately not done in a truly critical and self-critical way, which is evident by the aggressiveness of the way in which any attempt to critically reconstruct the leftist or anarchist past is made. More or less all this new effort is made in the warped light or half-light of the insubstantial incrimination of the class enemy, who is discovered to be harboring in the bowels of a class or anti-state consciousness which supposedly has failed to keep its virginal purity intact. .

This thing is not a democratic libertarian critique of an old self that also contained authoritarian anti-democratic elements, this thing is an anti-democratic critique of an old anti-democratic ''self'', that is, a critique that deftly eliminates some authoritarian elements of that ''self'' while simultaneously reinforcing some other, equally authoritarian ones .

A democratic path to a classless society does not mean a class compromise with sections of the bourgeoisie, but it means that:

1. This society cannot exist without the active free and voluntary agreement of the vast majority of the population of a country and the entire world people.

2. The democratic movement of working people which sets such a great goal cooperates fervently and openly but without class compromise with whatever section of the imperialist or non-imperialist ruling class or bourgeois liberal democratic elite stands for the democratic principle of majority rule with absolute respect of the minority and individual and minority rights.

3. All this cannot be ensured without general and free elections for the election of elected representatives.

The democratic exit from capitalism, without necessarily (on the contrary) meaning a peaceful exit, sounds like a utopia to the ears of today's leftists and anarchists.

Don't be fooled, some, even the neo-leftists who are sometimes enthroned in bourgeois government positions, listen to this request, this perspective, with the same suspicion, like a utopia, actually grumbling about some "negative correlations of forces", otherwise "I would show you ", they say, with a shining eye.

People cannot understand that a mass, therefore real exit from capitalism that does not mean another non-capitalist (or state-capitalist) statist monster, means one thing and one thing only:

A democratic road to socialism.

----

 

Experimental texts about line (2). The "leftmost" version of the socialist transition].

What I consider to be the only alternative "further left" strategy for achieving a classless society to the strategy of a radical democratic socialism (not to be confused, despite their "affinities", with the new left-wing social democratic democratic socialism) is the strategy of a Marxistically-fertilized anarcho-communism.

Here my heart likes it more, it burns, but I have to put the two alternatives in a equallity.

Let's see.

Who knows the great revolutionary strategist but full of passions and ultra-left contradictions Guy Debord?

It is worth reading his work, despite its various lunatic aspects, to see this strategy which also has lunatic but solid neo-Hegelian underpinnings, and marks the most vividly Marxist-inspired (self-evidently anti-Leninist) anarcho-communism of our time.

Let us stick to one of his proposals described in one of his brilliant phrases: "non-state dictatorship of the proletariat".

At another point, Guy Debord, with the cunning of a strategic ideological genius, had predicted, for he was certainly it tormented him, and probably worried, the reappearance of the concept-value and idea of democracy as a refuge for all the Stalinist and Trotskyist ruins when they will arrived to the historical wall that would crush their Bonapartist and dead-end adventurism.

It would be worth reading in his writings with what vitriolic irony he hurls this especially ideological prophecy, he was a real infernal revolutionary dragon spewing flames from his mouth.

I'm not flattering him, I'm a humble devil's advocate who wants to cause disruption to all vanguards, including the ''Situationistic'' anarcho-communist vanguard that he himself founded as a key appendage of revolutionary hell.

All power in the workers' councils and only in them, abolition of all territorial-ethnic and other divisions, absolute abolition of social hierarchies, re-appropriation of experienced creative time, abolition of wage labor but also of labor for free creative action, but, but, and here is the gist of his position: non-state dictatorship of the proletariat, exercising an immediate revolutionary destruction of any institution of mediation of the living forces by any representative or "political" institution including workers' "democracy".

Guy Debord is not a "democratist" by any means, and accepts the existence of a moment of absolute power of the working class (dictatorship of the proletariat) as long as it means the immediate, without delay, predominance of a non-state workers' communism and the abolition of any state or central-regional authoritarian institution of sovereignty.

This, yes, could be something that would not be related to some "democratic transition to socialism/communism" or the existence of a "workers' democracy", but I will do injustice to Guy Debord and the complex philosophical, artistic, revolutionary work of if I don't let you read it for yourself.

 

Ιωάννης Τζανάκος

 

 

 

 

Διόρθωση, ενδιαφέρουσας ψυχαναλυτικά, αβλεψίας.

Η εξέγερση στην Αθήνα έγινε το 2008 και όχι το 2018 όπως έγραψα.

Ευχαριστώ τον φίλο που το επισήμανε.

Ενδιαφέρον πάντως.

 

Ιωάννης Τζανάκος

 

 

Sahra Wagenknecht’s demonstration.

Adina Danes

 

I see discussions about how many far-right participants were at the Sahra Wagenknecht’s demonstration. Before the demonstration, the organizers sent ambiguous messages like “everybody is welcome” but “no far-right or Russian flag is allowed”. In other words, anybody can come, just hide your face under a “peace” flag instead of the flag that you would like to show. If there are doubts about the number of dubious people from the demonstration, just listen to the video below. In this video, when the organizers say that no pro-Russia-flags, -military symbols or -maps are allowed, you start hearing more and more booing sounds from the crowd (minute 0.54 is the peak): https://tinyurl.com/3jkendtx

A lot of people were revolted that they could not show these symbols at the demonstration. These sounds show that in the crowd there are a lot of people who are pro-aggressor or pro-aggression. Only based on this sound alone, we can say without exaggerating that this was a cross-front demonstration (querfront). If we also add all the images with persons from far-right circles (most came with peace signs btw), then any doubt will dissipate. Of course, if everybody comes with peace signs, how can you distinguish one group from another: https://twitter.com/Gegen_die_AfD/status/1629839196545269763

In addition, anybody with mild pro-Ukraine symbols or messages (so not about arms deliveries) would not have been safe during this demonstration, but, on the contrary, they would have been harassed (it happened).

This was a pro-Russia protest, with different subgroups of participants subscribing to this position and coming from different directions: DDR-nostalgia, pro-war Russian-Germans, far-right groups, conspiracy-oriented and Corona deniers, hard-campists/tankies-left (which I would not call left).

There were also left-wing people who don’t support the aggressor but went there because they thought it is a demonstration for peace, and because they are too stuck in their narrative to be able to distance themselves from the obvious toxicity of this protest.

Sahra Wagenknecht has a history of flirting with the far right on different topics, according to a lot of left-wing people. So, there is no wonder that a call launched by her, that focused on the safety of the “German people”, would gather such a mix of people.

 

Bonapartism is like an onion-mirror..

Bonapartism is like an onion-mirror with many skins (or peels), which all left-wing Bonapartists see when it is the their "next" Bonapartism to replace the previous other, but do not see themselves as the previous Bonapartism.
Only the later leftist-marxist Bonapartists saw  some ''leftist-marxist selves'' as Bonapartists.
Leninist Bonapartism showed the Mensheviks their own bourgeois liberal second-internationalist Bonapartism, Stalinist Bonapartism showed the Trotskyist Bonapartists who were the real Leninists the adventurist Bonapartism of Leninism by replacing it with their own Stalinist Bonapartism, and the Maoists who were the real post-Stalinist Bonapartists they showed to the real continue of Stalinist Bonapartism who were the Khrushchev-Brezhnevists (Stalin after he gained a lot of weight and he's got a big fat belly) the their Stalinist Bonapartism.
In the end, a Yeltsin and a Gorbachev come and close the shop, because the onion of "Marxist" Bonapartism also has an end, capitalism itself without "socialist" names and a mafia-like private sector now formed..by bonapartistic way.
Sometimes this game with the mirror onion seems to me to exist from the first Marxist moment, from the moment of the big explosion called Marx, who, looking at Louis Bonaparte in the mirror of his historical dialectic, peeling the mirror onion of bourgeois revolutions as if he saw himself as continuing in a series of Bonapartist unfoldings of the "Marxist self."
--
For reasons of meticulous clarity, I note at the end that apart from Lenin who spoke with a similar example about Thermidor that the Mensheviks would bring (analogously something like a Bonapartist version of the revolution, which however referred to the conservative deviation brought about by the "Thermidorian" regime after the execution of Robespierre) about Bonapartism in relation to a socialist revolution literally only Trotsky spoke, while the Stalinists spoke about something similar about Trotskyism and their relations between each other with other related terms, such as left or right revisionism (the Maoists)..and other labyrinths.
The most classical terminology of the phenomenon (with two different, as we have seen, but similar historical-analogical versions are of Marx himself, Lenin and Trotsky).
--
Are you saying that Bakunin was right after all?
Probably, but he and ''his'' movement had other problems, of a different nature, which also have a similar quality to the Bonapartist phenomenon.
 

Ιωάννης Τζανάκος

Δεκέμβριος, μη-επετειακό..

Τιμώ την εξέγερση τού Δεκέμβρη, γιατί δεν την τιμώ επετειακά, και έχω την φιλοσοφική έπαρση να λέω ότι μόνον έτσι τιμάται αυτή η εξέγερση, όταν δεν την τιμάς επετειακά.

Όποιος δεν αγγίχθηκε από αυτή την εξέγερση δεν έχει καταλάβει τίποτα από αυτό που έγινε τότε και από αυτό που θεμελιώθηκε τότε ως το πραγματικό μέλλον αυτής τής χώρας ως μιας ελευθεριακής και τολμώ να πω πραγματικά δημοκρατικής χώρας.

Δεν ήμουν τότε ενεργό στοιχείο τής εξέγερσης ούτε όμως απλός θεατής της.

Θυμάμαι όμως την μέθη, έλλογη μέθη, τον πραγματικό ρυθμό μιας εξέγερσης και τον φόβο και τον τρόμο «συναδέλφων» στη δουλειά μου που έπειτα αποδείχτηκαν σάπιοι, όχι ότι δεν φαίνονταν, διεφθαρμένοι, χαφιέδες και οικονομικά εγκληματικά στοιχεία. 

Θυμάμαι πόσο φοβόντουσαν, θυμάμαι πόσο μισούσαν, και θυμάμαι πόσο αλαλάζαμε εμείς, όσοι ζούσαν ακόμα, περνώντας αμήχανα σαν θεατές και μη θεατές από τα «πεδία των μαχών», ποιών μαχών δηλαδή, οι αστυνομικοί και οι ρουφιάνοι είχαν κρυφτεί σαν ποντίκια.

Αυτά, και τίποτα άλλο, μεγαλόστομο και μεγαλοπιασμένο..

Ιωάννης Τζανάκος