The world around us is breaking, and not by accident. Climate disasters, poisoned water, corrupt governments, rising inequality, all symptoms of a system built on domination: people over each other, people over nature.

Big promises from corporations and politicians won't save us. They were never meant to.

Real change doesn’t come from the top down. It grows from the bottom up - from our towns, our counties, our communities.

Right now across the U.S., people are already:

• Growing their own food in community gardens.

• Organizing mutual aid when disaster strikes.

• Taking back land through cooperatives and land trusts.

• Defending forests, rivers, and neighborhoods against destruction.

They aren't waiting for permission.

A truly ecological society — one rooted in freedom, care, and balance — doesn't start in Washington, D.C. It starts where you live.

• Local assemblies deciding what happens in your town.

• Community-controlled energy and food systems.

• Neighbors working together to protect land and life.

We can’t fix a broken system by begging it to change. We have to build something better — together, from the ground up.

What will you start reclaiming today?

The world around us is breaking, and not by accident. Climate disasters, poisoned water, corrupt governments, rising inequality, all symptoms of a system built on domination: people over each other, people over nature.

Big promises from corporations and politicians won't save us. They were never meant to.

Real change doesn’t come from the top down. It grows from the bottom up - from our towns, our counties, our communities.

Right now across the U.S., people are already:

• Growing their own food in community gardens.

• Organizing mutual aid when disaster strikes.

• Taking back land through cooperatives and land trusts.

• Defending forests, rivers, and neighborhoods against destruction.

They aren't waiting for permission.

A truly ecological society, one rooted in freedom, care, and balance, doesn't start in Washington, D.C. It starts where you live.

• Local assemblies deciding what happens in your town.

• Community-controlled energy and food systems.

• Neighbors working together to protect land and life.

We can’t fix a broken system by begging it to change. We have to build something better - together, from the ground up.

What will you start reclaiming today?

Resources on social ecology, communalism, and democratic confederalism

This is the second time, I've denazified a dangerous link to a known fash website

At first I thought it was a mistake, but twice, is a trend. This is the best time to practice anti authoritarian interlacing. It won't occur overnight, so take your time. But be extremely aware they want you dead, and cornered.

I've been part of the online left for a while now, part of slrpnk about 2 months, and if there's one recurring experience that's both exhausting and revealing, it's trying to have good-faith discussions with self-identified Marxist-Leninists, the kind often referred to as "tankies." I use that term here not as a lazy insult nor to dehumanize, but to describe a particular kind of online personality: the ones who dogmatically defend Marx, Lenin, Stalin, and every so-called "existing socialist state" past or present, without room for nuance, critique, or even basic empathy. Not all Marxist-Leninists are like this. But these people, these tankies, show up in every thread, every debate, every conversation about liberation, and somehow it always turns into a predictable mess.

It usually goes like this: I make a statement that critiques authoritarianism or centralized power, and suddenly I'm being accused of parroting CIA talking points, being a liberal in disguise, or not being a "real leftist." One time, I said "Totalitarianism kills" — a simple, arguably uncontroversial point. What followed was a barrage of replies claiming that the term was invented by Nazis, that Hannah Arendt (who apparently popularized it, I looked it up and it turns out she didn't) was an anti-semite, and that even using the word is inherently reactionary. When I clarified that I was speaking broadly about state violence and authoritarian mechanisms, the same people just doubled down, twisting my words, inventing claims I never made, and eventually accusing me of being some kind of crypto-fascist. This wasn’t a one-off, it happens constantly.

If you've spent any time in these spaces, you know what I'm talking about. The conversations never stays on topic. It always loops back to defending state socialism, reciting quotes from Lenin, minimizing atrocities as "bourgeois propaganda" and dragging anarchism as naive or counter-revolutionary. It's like they’re playing from a script.

I’ve spent a lot of time trying to understand why these interactions feel so uniquely frustrating. And over time, I’ve started noticing recurring patterns in the kind of people who show up this way. Again, a disclaimer here: not everyone who defends Marx or Lenin online falls into these patterns. There are thoughtful, sincere, and principled MLs who engage in real, grounded discussions. But then there are these other types:

1. The Theory Maximalist

This person treats political theory like scripture. They’ve read the texts (probably a lot of them) and they approach every conversation like a chance to prove their mastery. Everything becomes about citations, dialectics, and abstract arguments. When faced with real-world contradictions, their default move is to bury it under more theory. They mistake being well-read for being politically mature, and often completely miss the human, relational side of radical politics.

2. The Identity Leftist

For this person, being a leftist isn’t about organizing or material change. It’s an identity. They call themselves a Marxist-Leninist the way someone else might call themselves a punk or a metalhead. Defending state socialism becomes a cultural performance. They’re less interested in the complexity of history than in being on the “correct side” of whatever aesthetic battle they’re fighting. Anarchists, to them, represent softness or chaos, and that’s a threat to the image they’ve built for themselves.

3. The Terminally Online Subculturalist

This one lives in forums, Discords, or other niche Internet circles. Their entire political world is digital. They've likely never been to a union meeting, a mutual aid drive, or a community organizing session. All their knowledge of struggle is mediated through memes and screenshots. They treat ideology like a fandom and conflict like sport. They love the drama, the takedowns, the purity contests. The actual work of liberation? Irrelevant.

4. The Alienated Intellectual

This person is often very smart, often very isolated, and clings to ideology as a way of making sense of the world. They’re drawn to strict political systems because it gives them order and meaning in a chaotic life. And while they might not be malicious, they often struggle to engage with disagreement without feeling personally attacked. For them, criticism of Marxism-Leninism can feel like an existential threat, because it destabilizes the fragile structure they’ve built to cope with life.

These types don’t describe everyone, and they’re not meant to be a diagnosis or a dismissal. They're patterns I’ve noticed. Ways that a political identity can become rigid, defensive, and disconnected from real-world struggle.

And here’s the thing that’s always struck me as particularly ironic: Let's face it, a lot of these people would absolutely hate to be part of real socialist organizing. Because the kind of organizing that builds power, the kind that helps people survive, defend themselves, and grow; it's messy, emotionally challenging, and full of conflict. It requires flexibility, listening, and compromise. It doesn’t work if everyone’s just quoting dead guys and calling each other traitors. Anarchist or not, actual socialist practice is grounded in real life, not in endless internet warfare.

That’s why this whole cycle feels so tragic. Because behind all the posturing, the purity tests, and the ideological gatekeeping, there’s a legit reason these people ended up here. Of all the ideologies in the world, they chose communism. Why? Probably because they hurt. Because they saw the ugliness of capitalism and wanted something better. Because, at some point, they were moved by the idea that we could live without exploitation.

And somewhere along the way, that desire got calcified into a set of talking points. It got buried under defensiveness and online clout games. The pain turned inward, and now they lash out at anyone who doesn’t match their script. That’s not an excuse. But it is something to hold with empathy.

I don’t write this to mock anyone. I write it because I want us to do better, recognize our differences and hopefully come to a fair conclusion. And Idk, I still believe we can. Ape together strong 💖

cross-posted from: https://lemm.ee/post/62560258

Hello dear fellow human beings!

Let me clarify a few things.

We are one, all of us, all stardust, right from the belly of an exploding star, right to our shared evolution, history, & current technological & societal progress. All humanity and all life is one and connected, and so are all of our problems.

Poverty, hunger, homelessness, climate change, fascism, war, and even the global epidemic of loneliness & depression aren’t distinct disconnected problems. They are a singular globally connected problem. And it requires a singular globally connected solution.

All of these are problems of a skewed economy, aka wealth inequality. Those who don't have enough face poverty, hunger, homelessness, and a lifetime of financial insecurity. Those who have plenty, want even more, which leads to them dividing the masses by propaganda, eventually leading to fascism & war. Our collective mismanaged consumption is pushing us all towards climate catastrophe. All of these global issues are making us very lonely & depressed, and the overall society prone to crime & violence.

So how can we fix this skewed economy and our collective social issues? And is it even solvable?

Some might find the answer as obvious, some might consider it incorrect or impossible to achieve. Well, let me tell you folks, I've done the math, I've double checked my work, there is one and only one way out - Collectively!

Welcome to Collective Cake, a secular democratic global economic engine powered by all, and created for all. If we are the producers and if we are also the consumers, then we can manage our economy however we collectively want. It’s our Collective Cake, let’s take ownership and enjoy it best we can.

Is it a business? Or is it an cooperative? Is it a think tank? Or is it an economic union? Is it a democratically controlled, sustainability led unified global economy? It is anything & everything we want it to be. We get to collectively decide it!

Is it capitalism? Is it communism? Is it market socialism? All I will say about this is that capitalism is what exists right now, and market socialism is also capitalism, but the better kind. However, I want us all to refrain from using such labels while problem solving. Labels might help identify a sub-group, but it invariably causes division and we pick sides, we blindly love ours, and blindly hate theirs. An emotional response is not a well reasoned response. Lastly, if even one man cannot understand ambiguous or technical jargon, we have all collectively lost.

There's a lot for us talk about. Not a debate to be won, but a problem to be solved. Not using violence, but by strategy and collective action. Before we talk about the what or the how, we must talk more about the why. I have some thoughts that I'll share, but it doesn't matter for we can collectively decide and do anything we want. The matchstick has been lit.

Next week, I'll share my thoughts on our collective ethos or "our water".

Stay tuned!

Love, fakir

PS: enjoy this lovely animation that was released over 50 years ago!

Lots of good stuff here from a variety of viewpoints

The following is an excerpt from the World Peace Diet by Will Tuttle.

Most of us don’t think of our culture as being a herding culture. Looking around, we see mainly cars, roads, suburbs, cities, and factories, and while there are enormous fields of grain, and cattle grazing in the countryside, we may not realize that almost all of the grain is grown as livestock feed, and that most of the untold billions of birds, mammals, and fish we consume are confined out of sight in enormous concentration camps called factory farms. Though it is not as obvious to us today as it was to our forebears a few thousand years ago, our culture is, like theirs, essentially a herding culture, organized around owning and commodifying animals and eating them.

archived (Wayback Machine)

The World Peace Diet full-length PDF available here (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0)

BLIND ITEM: “The Watchlist Before the Crackdown”

An unnamed private tech firm—with longstanding contracts in predictive analytics, surveillance, and law enforcement integration—has partnered with a major U.S. federal agency (not officially DHS, but connected) to aggregate protest-related data across university campuses. This includes:

• Social media activity flagged by emotion-tracking AI
• Attendance at student government meetings
• Club affiliations labeled as “culturally radical”
• Usage of encrypted messaging apps on campus networks
• Anonymous feedback submitted to university “safety” portals
• Participation in Zoom-based teach-ins or virtual protest planning sessions

All of this is being collected silently, with university compliance. Some schools are not aware. Others are complicit.

The result?

A tiered watchlist.

• Tier 1: Identified protest leaders—already being targeted via immigration, academic misconduct, or financial aid audits  
• Tier 2: Repeat protest participants—monitored, flagged, and sometimes “randomly” subjected to disciplinary review or mental health assessments  
• Tier 3: “Radical-adjacent” individuals—students who haven’t protested publicly, but who engage with protest content, faculty, or groups  

This program does not show up in public records. It’s buried in private security contracts under language like “campus threat analysis” or “student behavioral tracking.”

What Can Be Done (Off the Record):

• Use public computers sparingly. On-campus networks are being monitored for metadata, not content—just enough to flag patterns.  
• Avoid student portals for organizing. Anonymous tips or incident reporting systems are quietly becoming snitch networks.  
• Print everything and destroy digital drafts. If you’re working on an exposé, flyer, or guide—create it offline, print it, and wipe it.  
• Speak in code when necessary. Resistance is ancient. If they’re using old-school surveillance, you use old-school subversion.  

Start documenting the surveillance itself. Make the watchers the watched. FOIA the firms. FOIA the funding. Begin to expose their shadow work.

~Subject Index: surveillance, predictive policing, digital profiling, student activism, protest suppression, university complicity, private sector firms, emotion-tracking AI, watchlists, encrypted messaging, metadata monitoring, resistance tactics, FOIA, dissent, behavioral tracking, campus surveillance, digital resistance, subversion, civil liberties, academic freedom~

by Colin Denny Donoghue

While it’s true many people are wrapped up in a consumer-corporate lifestyle and think trying to change the world is a naïve or impossible task not worth even trying, many other people are more actively compassionate and are giving a lot of time and effort to try and make this world a better place. Some of those engaged in this productive work, like The School of Living, have a better vision than others on how to achieve the goal of a healthier and more just society; from its founder Ralph Borsodi’s book Flight From the City, along with the later Decentralism by Mildred J. Loomis, to current vegan homesteading projects like Ahimsa Village, I find the ideas and praxis of philosophy toward achieving a sustainable society to be very on-target. Unfortunately many others do not yet see how crucial it is for people to be connected to the Earth in a more direct, natural and free way in order for there to be global social-justice, and in order to restore our environment, health, and sanity.

In “close-but-no-cigar” fashion (i.e. missing the crucial point), modern conservationists, scientists, sociologists and radical activists give key ideas for stopping and reversing the destructive ecological & health crisis we face, namely: we need much more decentralization of power, localization of organic food production, and we need much less environmental destruction, pollution, waste and radiation. As good as these ideas are, the critical problem with them is that their version of decentralization, localization and sustainability only go to a certain limited extent (limited within corporate/statist/monetary systemic restraints), and are alternatives accessible only to a relatively narrow segment of the world population. Here I will argue that the decentralist/localization/sustainability movement absolutely needs to go further, i.e. all the way to the universal individual level, in order for us to achieve the significant positive change the world needs. This “extreme” decentralization, localization and sustainable living would not only be more effective, but is in fact the only way to a globalization of equality and personal/environmental health. And it leads to a clear and specific destination: communities of sovereign zero-waste veganic homesteads. That way of life produces none of the environmental/health/life-destruction that is dominant now, and also fosters human equality, well-being and flourishing; more on why this is the real solution will be explained shortly.

The difference in perspective between what most people are offering as solutions and what’s offered here is fundamentally a difference between inside & outside-the-box thinking; the former is limited within the socioeconomic box (the box that is actually the main source of the problems), looking for within-the-system top-down solutions from State policies and programs (or the International Monetary Fund, etc.), rather than bottom-up solutions from autonomous individuals & the Earth’s ecology. This can also be looked at as a collectivist versus individualist way of thinking, though the former is often mistakenly equated with community, and the latter with a selfish isolationist perspective. In reality, collectivism means forced assimilation into a social-system while individualism has the ethical superiority of valuing individual sovereignty, self-responsibility, and voluntary relations.

archived (Wayback Machine)

To embrace veganism and forgo the consumption and utilization of animal products is not an end, but a beginning; a new start affording the practitioner an opportunity to see everyday realities in a different light.

However, to speak of the suffering of non-human animals and the benefits of a vegan lifestyle is often a disheartening situation to the vegan, for typically the first reaction of her audience is to disagree. Opponents of veganism say that the way vegans view human-animal relationships (i.e. radically) is wrong, and that, looming on the horizon, is a severe cost for such blatant societal insubordination. Ultimately, they prophesize, the error of veganism will become obvious and, eventually, the idea thrown away.

In a strange way, however, veganisms’s critics are correct.

Not until one realizes what makes veganism “unreasonable,” will the individual realize the true reasoning behind what it means to be vegan. Not until one questions what it is that depicts veganism as “wrong,” in the eyes of non-vegans will one gain the ability to adequately address the wrongs driving their refusal to accept humanity’s violent and unwarranted treatment of non-human animals. Not until the principles of veganism are applied to the rubric of injustice as a whole will one understand the need for veganism at all.

They are correct because veganism in isolation defeats the purpose for which it is intended.

And so it goes, for the alienation experienced as an effect of breaking social conventions is often enough to make one “question” her commitment to veganism.

As a philosophy, veganism stands in defiance to ideologies touching the core of Western thought. Opposed to the irrational belief systems which establishment institutions socialize people to “accept,” the principles of veganism challenge individuals to confront the dogma they are issued and to construct new ethics and values based on the premises of compassion and justice.

Confronting the existing belief systems, however, is a frightening concept to a society that has voluntarily conscripted itself to the dominant social paradigms of the state. However, as Brian Dominick so skillfully illustrates in the following essay, it is precisely this confrontation that we must agree to make if we are honest in seeking a true assessment of what social liberation has to offer. In the totality of this process, veganism is but one element in the compound structure of social revolution. It is in this light that Brian’s essay shines its brightest. Animal Liberation and Social Revolution is a compact framework designed to assist us as we embark on the endeavor of recognizing what roles compassion, critical thinking, and rationality (ought to) play in our simultaneous deconstruction and transformation of society. Relentless in his quest to set the proverbial wheels of this transformation in motion, Brian presses us to confront the oppressive ideologies we harbor within ourselves and to uncover their linkages to the injustice that pervades every sphere of our existence.

It is Brian’s belief that each of us has been given the tools to draw these necessary conclusions. It makes no difference if you are an anarchist approaching veganism, a vegan approaching anarchism, or neither of the two. All that is required is the willingness to roll up your sleeves, sharpen those tools and start drawing, in a concerted effort, to challenge humanity’s myopic vision of what constitutes a just society.

—Joseph M. Smith

November, 1995

archived (Wayback Machine)

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/41887016

I have attempted to read Anarchist books before. I found it difficult to read, boring, laborious, dated, and frankly the entire notion of Anarchist literature felt like it was missing the point of it’s subject matter. I will say that I am also someone who struggles to read a lot or at all, just for a point of comparison.

Then I stumbled into this book. It was a fucking amazing read, I could not put it away. Now it’s a biography, and that to me kind of sucked, as I had thought that biographies were what old people read in their infinite spare time, once they had finished every other book in the universe. That said, the guy’s life could just be fiction book. So does it really matter?

The book admittedly romanticizes a lot of nuance of Ben’s life away. The portrayal of street life, is made out be excited freedom balanced with the hardship of the road. Where that balance definitely feels further towards the freedom end of the spectrum. But it also leans into other challenges Ben faces latter in life, such as being deemed less important to the abortion rights movement by the very women he is fighting for, because he’s male. Unlike fiction and like real life the book doesn’t exactly have a happy ending. In large part because of Reitman’s relationship with Emma Goldman, but also because real life sucks.

What I am really saying is that for someone who always thought of themselves as an Anarchist, this book was the first one that I was truly able to sit down and read to completion without feeling like a lullaby was playing over my head. So I highly recommend it to anyone who read the first paragraph of this, and went – “yeah that’s me”.

For a slightly more broad point, this book is a really good example of actions speaking louder than words. I personally feel that the actions discussed here present a far more compelling argument against the state and capital than any theoretical guide ever could.

Link to download the book as a PDF

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/27774832

Abdullah Öcalan (1947 - )

Fri Apr 04, 1947

Image: **

✱Although some records claim Öcalan was born on April 4th, Öcalan himself claims to not know the exact date of his birth other than knowing it was between 1946-1947.

Abdullah Öcalan, born on this day in 1947, is a socialist theorist, feminist, political prisoner, and one of the founders of the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK). His concept of "democratic confederalism" has been influential in Rojava.

Öcalan helped found the PKK in 1978, and led it into the Kurdish-Turkish conflict in 1984. For most of his leadership, he was based in Syria, which provided sanctuary to the PKK until the late 1990s.

After being forced to leave Syria, Öcalan was abducted in Nairobi in 1999 by the Turkish National Intelligence Agency (MIT) (with the support of the CIA) and taken to Turkey, where he was sentenced to death under Article 125 of the Turkish Penal Code, which concerns the formation of armed organizations.

From prison, Öcalan has published several books, including "Prison Writings: The Roots of Civilisation", "Prison Writings Volume II: The PKK and the Kurdish Question in the 21st Century", and "Democratic Confederalism". Öcalan also advocates for a form of feminism known as "Jineology".

Öcalan's philosophy of democratic confederalism, which draws heavily from Murray Bookchin's concept of "communalism", is a strong influence on the political structures of Rojava, an autonomous polity formed in Syria in 2011.

"Without an analysis of women's status in the hierarchical system and the conditions under which she was enslaved, neither the state nor the class-based system that it rests upon can be understood."

- Abdullah Öcalan

• Date: 1947-04-04
• Learn More: web.archive.org, en.wikipedia.org, ocalanbooks.com.
• Tags: #Birthdays.
• Source: www.apeoplescalendar.org

Open Call: International Solidarity for Indonesian Democracy

Halt Indonesia's Slide into Military Dictatorship—Repeal the Authoritarian TNI Law Before It's Too Late!

We, Indonesian groups, organizations, activists, and individuals, raise our voices in outrage and condemnation as the Indonesian Parliament legalizes the revised Indonesian National Armed Forces Bill (UU TNI) today -- 20.03.2025. This law marks a devastating blow to democracy, human rights, and civilian supremacy in Indonesia, signaling a dangerous shift toward militarism and the rise of neo-fascist tendencies reminiscent of the dark days of the Suharto regime.

The revised UU TNI, now enacted, grants the military unprecedented powers to intervene in law enforcement, counter-terrorism, and civilian affairs. This blatant militarization of Indonesian society threatens to dismantle decades of democratic progress, suppress dissent, and institutionalize human rights violations. By eroding the boundary between military and civilian roles, this law entrenches authoritarianism and undermines the very foundations of democracy.

We cannot ignore the historical parallels. Under Suharto's military-backed dictatorship (1966–1998), Indonesia endured a brutal regime characterized by widespread human rights abuses, corruption, and the suppression of democracy. The military, or TNI, was a central pillar of Suharto's authoritarian rule, acting as both a political enforcer and a tool of repression. The regime's fascist tendencies silenced dissent, exploited resources for personal gain, and entrenched systemic corruption, leaving a legacy of trauma and injustice that Indonesians are still grappling with today.

The revised UU TNI risks reviving this dark chapter. By expanding the military's role in civilian affairs, the law paves the way for a return to the militarism, corruption, and authoritarianism of the Suharto era. This is not just a step backward—it is a leap toward neo-fascism, where the military becomes a tool of oppression. A Dangerous Continuation of Militarism

The timing of this law is deeply alarming, given the political rise of Prabowo Subianto, a former military general with a controversial past. Prabowo, who served as a high-ranking officer under Suharto, has been implicated in numerous human rights abuses, including the kidnapping of pro-democracy activists in 1998 and atrocities in East Timor and Papua. His political ascension, now as Indonesia's president, raises serious concerns about the resurgence of militarism and authoritarianism in the country.

Prabowo's background as a military leader with close ties to the Suharto regime underscores the dangers of the revised UU TNI. His presidency, combined with the expanded powers granted to the military, creates a perfect storm for the erosion of democracy and the normalization of authoritarian practices. This law not only reflects Prabowo's militaristic vision for Indonesia but also threatens to legitimize the use of military force against civilians, activists, and political opponents. We stand in unwavering solidarity with the people of Indonesia—students, activists, human rights defenders, and civil society organizations—who have courageously opposed this law. Our voices represent the aspirations of a free and democratic Indonesia, have been ignored by a government that prioritizes militarization over the will of its people.

We Demand Immediate Action:

Repeal the Revised UU TNI Now: The Indonesian government must immediately revoke this dangerous law and halt all efforts to expand the military's role in civilian life.

Restore Civilian Control: The military must be subordinated to civilian authority, as required in any democratic society. Its role must be strictly limited to defending the nation from external threats.

End Militarization and Protect Human Rights: The Indonesian government must ensure that the revised UU TNI is not used to suppress dissent, target activists, or violate human rights.

Respect the People's Resistance: The government must listen and obey to the millions of Indonesians who have protested this law and reject any attempt to silence their voices.

Global Accountability: The international community must hold the Indonesian government accountable for the consequences of this law, including any human rights abuses or democratic backsliding.

Since this article was written, at least 19 cities have simultaneously held protest demonstrations following the enactment of the TNI Law on March 20, 2025: Jakarta, Bandung, Manado, Pekanbaru, Yogyakarta, Makassar, Padang, Pontianak, Semarang, Samarinda, Medan, Papua, Ambon, Surabaya, Malang, Lampung, Bali, Palembang, and Aceh. During these protests, there has also been excessive use of violence by the police. The targets of this violence were random, such as the general public, anarchists, students, journalists, and even online motorcycle drivers. Nearly every city that held protests experienced police violence. A news agency (TEMPO), known for its criticism of government policies and performance, was terrorized by receiving a package containing a severed pig's head.

To the International Community:

The legalization of the revised UU TNI is not just an Indonesian problem—it is a global crisis. Indonesia plays a critical role in the fight for democracy and human rights in Southeast Asia and beyond, therefore, the rise of militarism and neo-fascism in Indonesia threatens regional stability and sets a dangerous precedent for authoritarian regimes worldwide.

The people of Indonesia have fought too hard and sacrificed too much for democracy to allow their country to slide back into the militarism, corruption, and authoritarianism of the Suharto era. We cannot remain silent as neo-fascism rises in Indonesia. Together, we must resist, fight back, and stand in solidarity with the people of Indonesia.

We call on the international community to:

Condemn Indonesia's Authoritarian Turn: Publicly denounce the revised UU TNI and its threat to democracy and human rights.

Stand with Indonesian Civil Society: Support the brave activists, students, and organizations resisting militarization and fighting for democracy.

Impose Consequences: Use diplomatic, economic, and political tools to pressure the Indonesian government to repeal this law and uphold democratic principles.

Monitor and Expose Abuses: Document and expose any human rights violations or anti-democratic actions resulting from the implementation of this law.

Head over to the Indonesian embassy in your country and give them a heads-up, in whatever way you want.

We rise, not in silence, but in raging fire.
A wildfire of defiance, fueled by the love of freedom,
and the unyielding spirit of those who refuse to kneel.
This is not just a fight for Indonesia,
but a battle cry for every soul who dares to dream
of a world unchained, unbowed, unbroken. We reject the chains of militarism,
the cold steel of authoritarianism,
and the suffocating grip of neo-fascism.
We are the voices of the oppressed,
the hands that build barricades,
the hearts that beat for anarchy—
the chaos, and the beautiful disorder of liberation.
We will not let the shadows of Suharto's regime
darken the skies of tomorrow.
We will not let Prabowo's militaristic dreams
trample the gardens of democracy.
We are the storm, the reckoning,
the ungovernable force that says:
Enough is enough. To the tyrants, the enforcers, the architects of oppression:
Your walls will crumble,
Your laws will burn,
Your power will dissolve like ash in the wind.
For we are the people,
wild, untamed, and free.
And we will fight,
not just for Indonesia,
but for the boundless, anarchist love of freedom
that lives in us all.

In Rage and Solidarity,
Indonesia
20.03.2025

Donate

If you wish to donate to anarchists on the ground, we, the Solidarity Committee for Indonesian Gelap, trust and edorse the following PayPal details held by the Komite Pembentukan Perhimpunan Merdeka (formation committee for the Perhimpunan Merdeka anarchist federation): [email protected]