Hunger Strike

My [1] reference to the tough struggle of a hunger strike does not necessarily mean that I would choose to use this specific means, without stating whether I agree or disagree with the means, as there is no right or wrong in such situations and everything is disputed and re-examined again and again.

Hunger Strike – Contradiction in a fighting position.

A hunger strike is the ultimate means of struggle of a revolutionary individual. Historically it has been used by a wide political spectrum of fighters held hostage for their subversive action, mainly against democratic regimes.

From the dead hunger strikers of the r.o. Red Army Faction (RAF) and the deaths of the fighters of the IRA and ETA, up to the successful hunger strikes of anarchist comrades such as Christophoros Marinos and Kostas Kalaremas, the members of Revolutionary Struggle and the CCF. Points in common can be minimal to non-existent, but there is a decision which remains the same, “I am fighting to the end.”

This decision has been capable of creating specific blackmail against the State. Blackmail which, as paradoxical as it might sound, has gained important power of negotiation because of the dead hunger strikers.

Of course, as we speak of power of negotiation we recognize the existence of equilibriums within the revolutionary war which are formed by the social, political and economic conditions of each era and the polarization that exists between statesmen and revolutionaries. This does not mean we respect them, the aim we set ourselves is to foil them and throw them to the rocks. Neither, however, does it mean that we do not hound them out, locate them and use them to our benefit.

A hunger strike is exactly such a case, where the humanistic façade of democracy is used in order to achieve the demands of the fighter. A battle is taking place against the political representation of the system, democracy, an explosive device which the fighter chooses to place inside her/his body and go right to the foundations of democratic cohesion, notifying that in the case of their demand not being met the explosion that follows will have a chain reaction within democracy.

It’s this notification that must be expressed in multiform ways from the comrades outside the walls. With a militant strategy that will definitely adapt itself depending on the circumstances, simultaneously aiming at the creation of a powerful political cost for every day that the State does not give in to the demands of the fighter.

Of course all this demands the cancellation of any institutional mediation and our clear separation from leftist crowns and their bastards.

Going from theory to practise I am publicly deposit some thoughts around practices and strategies that can be carried out during this tough and limited – in time – struggle. Believing that communication between the hostages and the free comrades must go both ways and not be limited to theoretical quests but put matters in the only field in which their effectiveness is tested, in practice.

Act one: Continuous Counter-Information

The visual frame: It functions as a forerunner of war with clear and aggressive anarchist words, it preserves the struggle of the comrade within the timeliness and at the same time informs the interested and the indifferent that no comrade of ours is alone and that as long as the State does not back down the attack will continue.

The ways: banners, posters, flyers, stencils, fill every corner of the city, occupations of buildings and radio stations make sure that the comrade’s struggle is an open wound for the State, interventions and p.a. systems in central points transmit anarchist perceptions and the words of the comrade, painting slogans on buses, trams, train wagons, stations and platforms of the underground, transfer together with the apathy and stress of the passengers, a clear message, – not a step back, victory for the struggle of our comrade.

Act two: Guerilla Action

The guerilla actions carried out aim among other things at creating pressure and causing social tensions and intra-systemic conflicts, the short-circuiting of social cohesion and the construction of an increasing intensity which is heading to a very specific target thus leaving the choice of decompression open to the State, which is none other than the immediate satisfaction of the comrade’s demands.

The guerilla attacks must be substantial and strategically targeted, whether we are talking about attacks that will become known because of their dynamic, or the choice of targets such as politicians and journalists which will be projected because of the publicity of their institutional roles. The message remains the same, the comrade’s struggle.

In the case of diffuse attacks on power it is necessary that the perpetrators claim the reasons and motives of the action. Next to the burnt-out ATMs and the government buildings blackened from arson attacks, slogans of solidarity and flyers inform passers-by that as long as the State does not retreat the attacks will continue.

This way even those who are indifferent and drowned in moderation will function as a tool of political pressure, since they will resent a prospect of insurrection resulting from a state of the many arbitrary and illegal actions that come to public awareness.

Subversive practices that are interconnected under a common demand and a common struggle with a clear and not so abstract meaning, gain a greater dynamic and multiply the intensity of the attacks, creating an explosive climate. The best and most recent example of the above, are the guerilla attacks and the political and social dynamic they created after the State attack on occupations, self-organized spaces and structures of the movement.

Act Three: In case of defeat

Because every battle carries the possibility of defeat, in the worst case that the comrade is murdered by the intransigent attitude of the State mechanism it is necessary to immediately create a counter-balance which will make the next lot of politicians responsible for managing similar cases to think very well of the consequences of such a choice.

The historical examples of political executions in Western Europe

Targeting individuals who bear a large share of responsibility for the death of the hunger striker. The torturers-doctors who performed forced feeding on the hunger strikers (Spain-GRAPO), the reactionary judges who made a career on the backs of the fighters (Germany- Holger Meine’s death), the political supervisors, general secretaries, ministers and their pack of hounds were and are a target. All this experience is a part of the revolutionary history which should not repeated like a farce, but with even more passion for freedom and more hate against our enemies.

Concerning the case of anarchist Kostas Sakkas

Anarchist K.Sakkas [2] has begun a hunger strike as of 4/6 demanding his immediate release. The reason is the vengeful extension of his pre-trial detention to 36 months, that is three whole years in custody. The vengeful treatment and arbitrariness of the State does not surprise us, nor should we call for a return to their legality.

Let’s not forget that we live in a world where the military operations, bombings and ethnic cleansing of invasive wars by the empires are taking place in the name of peace, along with the exterminating condemnation of people to the slow death of prison, in the name of a bloodthirsty and petty justice and an even more petty society.

By using their own contradictions and exploiting their weaknesses a chance is given to fight a decisive battle for the liberation of an anarchist comrade. At this point it is important to mention that the guerilla of the CCF Gerasimos Tsakalos is under the same regime of special captivity.

The conclusion we draw therefore from this oppressive choice of the State is that decisive individuals can cause important wounds to the State mechanism. To such a degree that the latter prefer to take on the political cost of illegal detainment, a State choice that creates cracks the façade of “humanism” and justice that they claim.

It is a fact that the State will push the situation to the extreme, aiming at the physical burnout of the fighter in order to shake his resolve.

We shall rise up against the extermination of our comrade. With every means and all standing next to the comrade.

CONSTANT ATTACK FOR THE RELEASE OF ANARCHIST KOSTAS SAKKAS

EVERYTHING FOR FREEDOM

LONG LIVE ANARCHY

P.S. In order to avoid any misunderstanding, the reason I am not abstaining from prison food is because I do not eat the prison food and take care of my food (cooking etc.) myself. To claim therefore that I am abstaining from prison food would be hypocritical and a conscious deceit of the comrades who would read such a thing and have a false impression. For the comrades who eat the prison food it can be a deprivation but in any other case it is abstract and without substance.

Avlona Prisons

June 2013

Nikos Romanos

[1] The author is one of four anarchists (Dimitris Politis, Yannis Michailidis, Andreas-Dimitris Bourzoukos) arrested in Febbruary 2013, accused in the Velventos-Kozani (Greece) robbery case.

[2] Kostas is an anarchist prisoner that currently stands two trials underway against the R.O. CCF, although he has denied his participation in the same anarchist urban guerrilla group from the moment of his arrest (December 2010.). The comrade has been kept in pretrial incarceration 30 months already. Recently, the State prolonged his pretrial incarceration for another 6 months (and applied the same measure against anarchist Gerasimos Tsakalos, admitted member of the R.O. CCF). Anarchist Kostas Sakkas is on hunger strike from the 4^th of June 2013 protesting the extension of his pre-trial detention, and demanding his immediate release from prison.