IndyMedia - Vrij Media Centrum Nederland

Hier kun je discussieren over In response to the call of ABC Belarus to condemn ACABB.
We twice considered the ABC Belarus proposal for a table and a talk on the situation in Belarus and their view on the Russian-Ukrainian war, but rejected it both times. Contrary to what ABC Belarus write in their callout, the main reason was clearly that “it is not acceptable to host positions that encourage joining a state army on an anarchist bookfair.” We are open to sharing both our emails if anyone asks.

The idea of asking ABC Belarus to be diplomatic about the Russian-Ukrainian war – like it was done in Infoladen Scherer 8 in Berlin two months before – or to offer a more suitable format for that subject was floated but dismissed due to the general distrust toward a particular presenter from ABC Belarus. When it was found out that some of the allegations against that person were wrong, we apologised and reconsidered the proposal in full. However, it was ultimately decided in a bigger plenary circle that a presentation or books where state army participation can be glorified are not a good basis for rebuilding relations with anarchists of anti-militarist views.

No dialogue?

The main claim of the ABC Belarus’ callout – that ACABB were not interested in dialogue – is simply untrue. Because:

a) We actually invited them anyway in our emails
Quote from an email: “You are nonetheless welcome to come and participate at the event otherwise. We find it important to be able to debate and learn from each other not in a toxic setting.”
The word ‘nonetheless’ refers to the complaints about unreliability and provocative behaviour of the specific presenter.

b) Explained in a private chat (since we are now referring to such things) that people from the organising group would prefer to restart the exchange of arguments on the Russian-Ukrainian war not in the public environment of an open book fair event but in smaller, closed circles.

What we actually wanted to avoid was a monologue. Experience of other anarchist events with strong anti-militarist participation shows that public talks or tables defending participation in state armies have a high potential to turn fiery. It is not a good way of restarting dialogue. The events in St-Imier and Ljubljana, for example, ended up in pointless shouting instead of constructive exchange. If anything, the format of giving a talk at a book fair like ABC Belarus applied for is more a monologue-like communication. We collectively decided that this format is not suitable at this moment of the anarchist debate on the RU-UA war and invited them come to the event not under the banner of an organisation.

Onto online fronts

Yet, the monologue has now moved online. The stage ABC Belarus seem to set now with their scandalising outburst is the one for self-victimisation. Placing an event that has never happened before – initiated by anonymous individuals from different anarchist tendencies, many not even from Europe – at the centre of a narrative about the powerful ‘Western European anarchist’ consensus aligned with ‘old anti-militarist and pacifist perspectives’ fed by ‘Russian propaganda’ seems frankly more like seeing ghosts or imagining a perpetrator. At the moment of their callout’s release, neither the event programme, nor a list of book fair tablers had been published to draw any judgement of such proportion.

To exaggerate so blatantly – comparing an anarchist event organising to the Belarusian state (like, what?), calling out a first-time event ‘the’ book fair, like it is the only one and claims to represent someone, inserting a lie about refusing dialogue in the title, so it sounds heavy, and releasing it in social media pictures – all this resembles rather a clickbait online marketing move, not a responsible communication to the comrades on the ground. What kind of a marketing strategy is that at the expense of other anarchists?

In our emails, we stated that the general distrust toward ABC Belarus stems from the provocative and escalatory communication style of one of its presenters. (For example, even if we condemn the sabotage against their talk in St-Imier, many will remember the rain of person’s abusive language and generalisations coming from the stage. The event transcript can be found online.) The group stood behind this person, shielding their irritativeness under ‘the collective’s political position’. It’s telling that in their callout they admit they expected rejection due to ACABB’s anti-militarist stance, and then applied anyway.

For what purpose, then? To deliberately provoke and dramatise the rejection? To knit ACABB into their narrative about the fight against a grand ‘Western European anarchist’ plot to take them down? Is this just cynically creating drama to generate views and fundraise?

In this regard, comparing the promotion strategies of the different groups engaged with a war theme, it’s noteworthy that working with highly emotional, uplifting and heartbreaking topics like life and death of war heros or nation’s defenders is much better suited for fundraising and click-based engagement than sharing sobering and humiliating stories of deserters, arbitrary conscription, or post-war trauma. Maybe that is the way to go for anarchists, too?

So, ABC Belarus encourage you to condemn ACABB. For what exactly?

1) “Manipulation of facts”?

In our exchange with ABC Belarus, we brought up the presentations in Bremen and Infoladen Scherer 8 in Berlin as the latest examples of why distrust had arisen toward their presenter.

Indeed, the allegations from Bremen turned out to be false – and we apologised for that to ABC Belarus in our very next email. Somehow, the author of the callout fails to mention our apology – isn’t it a manipulation of facts they meant to condemn?

As for Infoladen Scherer 8: the ABC Belarus presenter had been warned by the venue that supporting the state army participation may provoke backlash. Yet, they decided to lay out such materials at their distro. The venue (and ACABB) did receive a complaint about one zine eventually later. When ABC Belarus presenter reached out for the feedback to the venue, they actually confirmed the issue and named the zine that has been the trigger. (It was this one, for some reason with an anarchist in state military uniform on the Russian-language version cover.)

So, the claim in the callout that there has been ‘no complaints from the venue’ is simply not true. The distortion of facts to fabricate arguments seems to be a political tool available not only in ‘Western European anarchist’ consensus forges.

2) Formalisation of censorship?

Our phrasing of “no value seen for you” was indeed inelegant, and we take that critique on the chin. This is our first time organising a book fair, and we will learn from it.

What we meant was that a possible escalation at a book fair around the RU-UA war topic will not advance debate between the anti-militarists and those who defend state army participation, let alone bring some reconciliation. We didn’t think about another value for them though: if ABC Belarus want to profit from drama.

(dramatic look)

As already mentioned, our solution for restarting dialogue is to actually informalise it. That is why we told ABC Belarus (and Solidarity Collectives) to feel welcome to come to the event as private persons to be able to learn from each other. To call that ‘formalisation of repression’ is baffling. Our approach is the opposite of ‘no dialogue’.

Needless to say, there are plenty of anarchist spaces where the presentations of groups out of the now released ACABB event programme might be rejected. It is delusional to expect neutrality from venues, especially if they draw their lines already on their web home page.

3) The West against us

ACABB 2025 never put themselves in a position to represent the opinion of Western European anarchists, simply because we are only a bunch of individuals from very mixed backgrounds. It is beyond comprehension what from a clear and minimalistic anti-militarist position ACABB communicated to ABC Belarus – namely that we are against ‘glorification of state army participation or being apologetic of military service’ – coincides with ‘Russian propaganda’. What curiously does remind of it though is ABC Belarus painting ‘the collective West’ as an Enemy.

We are also unsure whose analysis is ‘outdated.’ The war has raged on for more than three years with no end in sight. The Ukrainian army has been supported by the US and Europe just enough to keep Putin satisfied with slow territorial gains of the Russian army – just to keep his bloody hand off the nuclear bomb button. Since the Ukrainian army blocked any idea of an anti-authoritarian platoon and the Kursk incursion was rolled back, anarchist revolutionary ideas play no role in this war. If by ‘not our war’ the author means “not an anarchist war”, we completely agree. It surely can be called anti-imperialist or anti-fascist, but not anarchist or not anymore anti-authoritarian.

We don’t encounter such kind of analysis from anarchists who see state military participation as the primary option often. Nor do we see any attempt from them to engage anti-militarists on equal footing. As the last email of the ABC Belarus put it, they laid out provocative informational material at Scherer 8 ‘to educate western anarchists and leftists’. We wonder if anyone looks forward to be “educated” at anarchist events.

Concluding note

The jerky hints in this text questioning the integrity of ABC Belarus’ intentions are, of course, jokes. We genuinely appreciate all the years of their committed anti-repression work. If the attention generated by their fight against the ‘Western European anarchism’ translates into love and freedom for Belarusian anarchist prisoners, all the better. The reason for their ridiculing language and scandal-mongering is much more likely to be some bruised egos from not being recognised as a desirable speaker for an anarchist event. The only thing that doesn’t fit here for us is that the group picked ACABB as a scapegoat for an older communication breakdown with anti-militarist anarchists. Surely, some anti-militarists are also to blame for that, but, hey, here are some new ones to talk to in person.

As already implied in our invitation text, ACABB aspires to be not a politicised festival for people to just consume ideas and come to watch an explosive discussion, but a space where people actively engage in deliberation on collective solutions (and hopefully build new gangs ???? ). We are not interested in deepening the divide between the anarchists defending the participation in state armies and the ones opposing it. It would be far more useful at the moment of such division to sit together as individuals at eye level and try to re-build connections. We have already confirmed such an event at ACABB about the RU-UA war and welcome everyone who seeks conversation, not escalation.

one of the acabb