Verbich’s attack and the reaction of anarchists
Recently, the Ukrainian media spread the news about the attack on the former C14 participant and, in combination, ATO veteran Dmitry Verbich. It has become known that the attack on Verbich is attributed to anarchists, whose attacks on the Nazis were published by our site. Indeed, anarchists attack the far right, which is identified by external symbols — Celtic crosses, swastikas and symbols of party affiliation. The attacks published on our website were either targeted (revanchists, members of subcultural far-right groups) or were identified by Nazi symbols.
What is the problem with Dmitry? Having studied his social networks, it can be understood that he is not a C14 activist at the moment, although he called for the murderers of the pro-Russian publicist Buzina to come to court. And judging by his own words at the briefing, he had no nationalist symbols and was at that moment in a T-shirt with Isa Munayev. Anarchists have no reason to attack such a person with a knife, especially judging by the nature of the attack, it was accidental. Why are the far right so persistently trying to attribute the attack to the anarchists? The only “evidence” is allegedly the presence of people in similar clothes on the May Day procession. Apparently, we are dealing with another attempt to link any attack with anarchists, and specifically activists from Kiev. Such attempts have already been made in the attack on the far-right from the White Hammer (Vitaly Regor), which was attacked by a supporter of the Russian world, and also with a knife. The first versions of the far right have traditionally been about being attacked by anarchists.
The reaction of the media is also extremely entertaining. Having brought to the forefront the fact that Dmitry was a participant in the anti-terrorist operation, the media began to promote this story as an attack on a participant in the defense of the Donetsk airport. Unfortunately, there is outright hypocrisy in the face, because when ATO members were attacked by neo-Nazis in Lviv (represented by AO activists and, more recently, Radeon Bagaev, who was attacked by National Corps activists) — the media almost unanimously concealed these facts. As a last resort, mentioning that members of such an organization or environmental activists were attacked. Why doesn’t their participation in the combat zone appear there? Which veterans can be beaten, and which beatings should be publicly condemned? Only in cases when representatives of far-right groups are ready to stand up for a person? For us in general, the cult of those who went to war does not make much sense — if a person fought against Russia and pro-Russian combatants, it does not mean that in this way he was justified in all acts committed or committed in the future. Some odious far-right activists also took part in the fighting, and upon their return organized attacks on innocent people and disrupted the activities of their political opponents. Such people deserve fair retribution and participation in the war does not justify them.
The reaction of some anarchists is also significant. Hastening to absolve themselves of responsibility for all acts of violence against the far right, some anarchist resources have continued to call for peace and end street violence, completely forgetting who is the source of the violence and why. Calling the far right for peace seems as naive as calling the FSB to stop torturing anarchists and the police to disperse demonstrations. Far-right attacks are due to the cult of power that prevails in fascist ideology. Such a toothless position will drive the anarchists deeper into a marginal state in which they are unable to adequately repel the Nazis or promote their own agenda and ideas. The only way for us to fight the Nazis is to repel them, as we have already written in one of our articles.
We cannot speak on behalf of the people who attacked Dmitry, but we condemn such actions if they were committed by anarchists. Attacks on Nazis must be targeted and find an opponent only by clearly identifying with Nazi symbols or their political activities. His past in the form of cooperation with a radical right-wing organization is reprehensible, but does not require the use of violence, which in this case seems pointless.