The most recent issue of “Avalanche – Anarchist Correspondence” is out now. This issue features writings from Sweden, the Netherlands, Germany, and France.
The publication — which has always been denied to increase communication between anarchists — elaborates on its goals in this issue’s editorial. Some contributors to the journal address the question of “internationalism” asking what that means for anarchists and how it manifests it in struggle. An excerpt from the editorial gives a good indication of the perspectives present in the journal:
Internationalism is the perspective that tries to get rid of the imposed concepts of borders and states, since the struggle and the solidarity of the enemies of all domination has to be carried beyond all barriers and borders of power. Internationalism means considering the international dimension of local incidents and processes as well as it means the internationalist dimension of the anarchist idea – that of a liberating perspective for each human being no matter in what place, no matter where she comes from. Since in this world liberation has always something to do with destruction, the ground on which we can get to know each other and discuss and meet far away from identities and cliches, from masks and shame, is also the ground on which we tell about our struggles, about struggling for freedom and about the destruction of our oppression. Where we talk about how we try to express our hostility against all domination in practical terms and dynamics.
The idea of this publication is to gather different contributions in which the authors speak from their own perspective and viewpoint about struggles and developments taking place where they live, thus making it possible for an internationalist readership to comprehend them.
Avalanche is at the same time an attempt to stimulate a reciprocally feeding discourse and to be a frame for eventually developing correspondences. Correspondence in the sense of the idea and possibility to take up questions and perspectives of other contributions and spin and carry them further in direction of the own reality or criticizing and questioning them. Like this can arise potentially a stimulus, an intensification of perspective and a clarifying of ideas. But this is although a big challenge, because it needs the active participation of different comrades. Maybe exactly this is fundamental for internationalism: Relationships don ́t just come to life where one is pleasing and consuming each other, and one still stays separated through distances, no, but rather where one is challenging each other – and one is confronting oneself with the challenge of coming together to deal with each other, to honestly and directly express the proper ideas, proposals and critiques.
In this sense we want to confront ourselves with the reality of the internationalist relationships and see, from whom contributions – so new texts or already pub- lished texts with a short introduction – are getting sent, and with whom it is possible to discuss about possible contributions – also interviews – instead of artificially constructing a participation by publishing articles from other publications or the internet. And for sure it is more likely possible on the basis of real relationships to ask and dig deeper for contributions to this project. Maybe this digging deeper for something is an important aspect that gets lost in many ways in the world of the internet. A digging in direction of “what’s happening at the moment? Where do we want to go? And how and on what ways?” Fundamental questions that should be at the be- ginning of any project and affinitarian relationship, and with which one is confronted again and again. And exactly ’cause these question are something basically individual, the “answering” of this questions can be done by nobody but ourselves. Those that are really in place and involved in the struggles can probably say and reflect best what’s going on and where they want to go. The role of those who think they can explain everything to others or recuperate struggles for themselves, opens the door for ideologization and delegation. A relation- ship cannot be developed on the basis of prefabricated frames of explanation and a prejudged perception, on the abstraction of concrete realities and the objectification of individuals, but only where everybody speaks for oneself. This is the basis where we imagine this project and the basis on which we call all those, that feel affinity to this project, to contribute to it.