Τα παιδιά της γαλαρίας

ΣΧΕΤΙΚΑ ΜΕ ΤΗ ΔΥΣΤΟΠΙΚΗ ΠΡΑΓΜΑΤΙΚΟΤΗΤΑ ΤΟΥ ΚΟΡΟΝΟΪΟΥ-Report from Greece on the corona-virus dystopian reality

Ενημέρωση από την Ελλάδα

Το παρακάτω κείμενο γράφτηκε στα αγγλικά στις 21-22 Μάρτη προς ενημέρωση συντρόφων του εξωτερικού. Περιλαμβάνει γεγονότα που είναι πασίγνωστα στους ντόπιους αναγνώστες. Θα μπορούσε, ωστόσο, να χρησιμεύσει ως ημερολόγιο καταστρώματος, γι’ αυτό και η δημοσίευση της μεταγραφής του στα ελληνικά, με την προσθήκη σημειώσεων για τους μήνες Απρίλιο και Μάιο.

Μπορεί στην Ελλάδα το «καθεστώς εξαίρεσης» να μην είναι ένα ασυνήθιστο φαινόμενο, ωστόσο παρά το γεγονός ότι βρισκόμαστε –ήδη από την εποχή που ξέσπασε η λεγόμενη «κρίση χρέους» το 2009– σε ένα παρατεταμένο καθεστώς έκτακτης ανάγκης, με βασική αιχμή την εφαρμογή πολιτικών ακραίας λιτότητας και καταστολής, η πρόσφατη βιοπολιτική διαχείριση της πανδημίας του SARS-CoV-2 από την κυβέρνηση φαίνεται να βαθαίνει περαιτέρω τις διαδικασίες υποτίμησης και πειθάρχησης του προλεταριάτου.

 

…….

 

22/3/2020,

Συνέλευση Εργαζομένων και Ανέργων από την πλατεία Συντάγματος

Τα Παιδιά της Γαλαρίας

 

Το κείμενο σε pdf

REPORT FROM GREECE ON THE CORONA-VIRUS DYSTOPIAN REALITY

Αναρτήθηκε από: Τα παιδιά της γαλαρίας | 20 Μαΐου 2020

ΑΛΛΗΛΕΓΓΥΗ ΣΕ ΔΙΩΚΟΜΕΝΟΥΣ ΑΚΤΙΒΙΣΤΕΣ ΠΟΥ ΣΥΜΜΕΤΕΙΧΑΝ ΣΕ ΔΡΑΣΕΙΣ ΤΗΣ ΠΟΛΙΤΙΚΗΣ ΣΥΛΛΟΓΙΚΟΤΗΤΑΣ PADRONE DI MERDA ΣΤΗΝ ΜΠΟΛΟΝΙΑ

 

Σήμερα το πρωί, 18/5, με τη λήξη της καραντίνας στην Ιταλία, η αστυνομία εισέβαλλε στα σπίτια 13 ατόμων που σχετίζονται με την πολιτική συλλογικότητα PADRONE DI MERDA (Σκατο-Αφεντικά) -χωρίς να είναι όλα μέλη της- και τα οδήγησε στο δικαστήριο. Σύμφωνα με νόμο που προέρχεται από την περίοδο της φασιστικής διακυβέρνησης, 5 από αυτά διατάχθηκαν να εγκαταλείψουν την Μπολόνια εντός 24 ωρών (για απροσδιόριστο χρονικό διάστημα) και σε ένα επιβλήθηκε απαγόρευση προσέγγισης του πρώην αφεντικού του και του πρώην χώρου εργασίας του.

Η δικαστική αυτή εντολή αποτελεί «προληπτικό μέτρο», επαφίεται για την έκδοσή της στην διακριτική ευχέρεια του δικαστή και είναι άμεσα εκτελεστή χωρίς δίκη. Η κατηγορία αφορά «άσκηση βίας» και «παρενόχληση» των αφεντικών στον χώρο εργασίας στη διάρκεια διαμαρτυριών για απλήρωτους μισθούς!

Είναι σαφές ότι η διαχείριση της πανδημίας από το καπιταλιστικό κράτος, τόσο στη διάρκεια της καραντίνας όσο και μετά, είναι πολύ πιο επικίνδυνη από την ίδια την πανδημία. Όπως λένε και οι σύντροφοι PADRONE DI MERDA στην ανακοίνωσή τους, «Την ημέρα του νέου ανοίγματος πολλών επιχειρήσεων μετά από μήνες καραντίνας, η λέξη-κλειδί είναι η «οικονομική ανάκαμψη», αλλά το μήνυμα είναι σαφές: αυτή η ανάκαμψη αφορά μόνο τα αφεντικά. Κανείς δεν νοιάζεται για νέους, επισφαλείς και εκμεταλλευόμενους εργαζόμενους, οι οποίοι πολύ συχνά δεν έχουν δεχτεί δεκάρα κατά τη διάρκεια αυτής της περιόδου.»

Η συλλογικότητα PADRONE DI MERDA αποτελείται από επισφαλείς εργαζόμενους που έχουν βάλει στο στόχαστρό τους αφεντικά και ιδιοκτήτες σπιτιών καταγγέλλοντας συνθήκες εκμετάλλευσης και κάθε είδους παρενόχληση. Σύμφωνα με τη συνήθη τακτική τους, πηγαίνουν στο χώρο εργασίας/κατοικίας του κάθε φορά καταγγελλόμενου (από τους ίδιους ή άλλους) Σκατο-Αφεντικού και φροντίζουν με τρικάκια, πανώ, ντουντούκα κλπ. να τους ξεμπροστιάσουν. Δεν έχουν καμιά συνδικαλιστική κάλυψη, γι’ αυτό και φοράνε μάσκες στη διάρκεια των δράσεών τους – πέρα από το γεγονός ότι η χρήση της μάσκας γι’ αυτούς συμβολίζει τη μη προσωπική διάσταση της εκάστοτε ενέργειας.

Στον παρακάτω σύνδεσμο θα βρείτε το κείμενο καταγγελίας της συλλογικότητας στα αγγλικά και ιταλικά καθώς και τη δυνατότητα οικονομικής ενίσχυσης για τα δικαστικά έξοδα.

https://www.ilpadronedimerda.it/

Αναρτήθηκε από: Τα παιδιά της γαλαρίας | 19 Μαΐου 2020

* Ολόκληρο το τεύχος 18

Τεύχος 18: Αφιερωμένο στους «κριτικούς» συνοδοιπόρους της εξουσίας (της κάθε εξουσίας)

 

 

 

Περιεχόμενα

 

To τεύχος σε pdf

 

 

 

Αναρτήθηκε από: Τα παιδιά της γαλαρίας | 8 Απριλίου 2020

Report from Greece on the corona-virus dystopian reality

While in Greece “states of exception” have not been uncommon –on the contrary, more or less we have been in an extraordinary, emergency regime of extreme austerity and repression due to the “debt crisis” since 2010– the recent biopolitical management of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic by the government seems to be increasingly authoritarian.

Initially, in late February and early March, when the first cases of infected people were reported –ironically, most of them were pilgrims returning from Israel and Jerusalem bringing not only Holy Grace back home– the only measures taken were the cancellation of carnival events and the closures of schools, universities, theatres and cinemas in some affected regions where most cases were detected. As more were to follow, all educational institutions closed down for 14 days on March 11th, then followed cafes, bars, malls, restaurants, gyms, museums, archaeological sites, excluding supermarkets, pharmacies and food outlets for delivery and take-aways only. News reports became more and more terrifying starting with the number of deaths in the country and nearby countries and the government slogan “We remain indoors” began overwhelming the public sphere. A cell broadcast message was sent to all smartphones on 11, March by a government agency supposedly to inform people on the virus but causing more anxiety and confusion and another one followed a week later stressing again the necessity to “remain indoors”. Actually, a lot of people ignored the government call for self-restrictions on movement and outdoor gathering and went out to beaches and open air places. The next days all organized beaches and tourist resorts closed, air traffic with Italy and Spain was banned and some days later the borders with Albania and North Macedonia closed.

Public transport has been restricted, passengers to Greece will be detained at home for 14 days and since Wednesday (18/3) all retail shops except few categories have been closed down. Panic reactions in supermarkets with hordes of people amassing huge quantities of commodities (+42% compared a month before, if fast-moving consumer goods are taken into account) led to restrictions on number of customers in a given supermarket and the imposition of a minimum distance between customers.

With a devastated public health system after subsequent Memoranda and cuts, the government knows only too well why they should be panicked when thousands of people will become ill with the virus. The announcement of urgent hiring of 2000 doctors and nurses with a two-year work contract is next to nothing compared to the low number of Intensive Care Units functioning (557 instead of 3500), with 80 of them being idle due to lack of personnel and 25% of them being permanently closed. The overworked hospital personnel had been cut during the previous years, job vacancies are 45000 and public health expenses range between a meagre 4.7 to 5.2 % of the GDP – beware the -30% decrease of GDP, compared to 2009 results, when discussing those ridiculously small percentages.

The prime minister wife’s initiative to call people to “thank” doctors and nurses for their efforts against the virus by clapping their hands in their balconies at a fixed time in the evening some days ago had unfortunately some success and, for the time being at least, it shows the extent of the resignation of the population in the face of the state terrorist slogan of “remain indoors”, which prevents public demands for a rise in social reproduction state expenses.

It is important to note that it is a conservative, right-wing neoliberal government that applies state interventionist measures, praises public hospitals and the national medical system in general, bans national parades (both military and school ones), closes churches and turns the “Invisible Hand” of the market wherever they want.

Although the Greek state has been under Enhanced Surveillance for ten years now, the institutions and the Eurogroup decided on Monday (16/3) to scrap its obligation for a primary surplus of 3.5% of GDP this year. Also, the government has promised liquidity shots (2 bn) to affected businesses and announced suspension of amortization payments as well as payments of tax and insurance liabilities, requisition of private hospital beds etc. Central planning at its best!

As days pass, the restrictive measures in movement become heavier and the propaganda of fear is gaining ground. Even political groups of the anti-authoritarian milieu limit their activities, cancel their events or even approve of the quarantine in the name of public health protection and “(self)-responsibility”.

The isolation or self-isolation imposed at the moment is not very promising as the necessary precondition for any successful struggle is cooperation through physical encounter. At the same time, an attitude of internalized self-discipline and fear (if not even outcry of “irresponsible behaviour’’ on the part of those still gathering in public spaces and social centers) can be very convenient indeed for the state and its repressive mechanisms, as the outcome of a recent antifascist demo in the town of Rethymno showed: 100 people were surrounded by cops, beaten up and taken to court. One wonders what will happen if workers start organizing around demands such as full wages, less work hours or stop altogether, bigger unemployment benefits, paid medical expenses…

The “wages of exception“ in a state of exception

Even though many (small-scale and large-scale) capitalists have profited from the implementation of the extreme austerity policies of the last 10 years, by means of labour market deregulation, both direct and indirect wage decreases, tax redemptions etc, their greed seems bottomless. Currently, they try to take advantage of the declared “state of emergency’ (or situation of “war economy” as the prime minister called it during one recent TV address): the Greek state capitalizes on the COVID-19 pandemic to further implement new emergency laws that will lead in the enhanced precariousness of labour and waged-labour cost decrease, in line with the persistent neoliberal doctrines. From the capitalist point of view the timing is crucial, as the financial consequences of the COVD-19 crisis are yet to be seen. In terms of the Greek regime of accumulation, it must be kept in mind that the tourist sector and all tourist-related services, such as cafes, restaurants, catering, construction/renovation, retail, logistics etc., are among the most important ones in terms of their GDP share.

What follows is a short list of measures that have been announced over the last week. It is important to note that these measures affect differently the various sectors of value production and circulation, so they should be used with caution when it comes to generalize about i.e. direct and indirect wage decreases or the legal status of those currently unemployed. On the other hand, this list is indicative of the capitalist strategy to a) pass on the lion’s share of the financial cost to the working class and b) further designate a labour market that will allow larger profit margins, when “normal” conditions of value production and realization are re-established.

In the public sector:

Workers in schools, universities etc. have not been working since March the 11th, following the government’s decision to lock down all educational facilities, ranging from state nursery schools to universities. Sport facilities, gyms and museums were also affected by this ban. Despite the fact that those workers are not currently working they still get paid accordingly (for the moment at least).

The most affected public sector workers by the COVID-19 outbreak are, obviously, ,nurses, doctors and all others working in hospitals, who have to work under extremely intensive and dangerous conditions. Following a massive downsizing of public healthcare system due to both a 25% personnel decrease and slashed state funding, the understaffed and under-equipped hospitals will soon be unable to handle emergencies related to COVID-19 or other causes. For the moment, in most hospitals no COVID-19 tests are conducted to the hospital personnel, while the tests are used for seriously infected patients or the elderly. In some cases, due to lack of specialized personnel, unpaid MSc or PhD students have to analyze the results, leading in crucial delays. On top of that, the understaffed personnel is forced to remain in service despite showing signs of the virus infection and having access to very limited resources of personal protective masks and/or gloves. As mentioned above, there are only 557 active intensive care beds nationwide (224 in Athens, alone). The same is true for the hospitals on islands where the infrastructure and personnel is not sufficient to accommodate the needs of both locals and immigrants (see below). To deal with the current emergency situation the government has decided to immediately hire 2,000 doctors and nursing stuff, a number which simply sounds like a complete joke when compared to the 26,000 personnel decrease, between 2010-2018, even more so because that number corresponds to the new job positions that had already been announced since early June, some months before the COVID-19 was first reported in China… One should always keep in mind that by the first implementation of Memoranda in 2010 the hospitals were already understaffed, as a result of state policies to continuously keep healthcare funding below EU average. In that sense the post-2010 devalorisation politics have decisively deteriorated and already devastated sector.

The “We remain indoors” propaganda has been proven successful in decreasing hospital workload too, as it is not only the streets and public spaces that are evacuated by the citizens, but also the emergency clinics of hospitals. It must be noted that out-patient clinics have effectively been shut down (excl. drug prescriptions) thus limiting the access to state healthcare by default. It is through this artificial and violent constriction of social medical needs that the state healthcare system is still functional.

In the private sector:

In all, after the gradual locking down of numerous sectors ca. 1,000.000 workers are estimated to be (either temporarily or not) without work. Those workers are not entitled to get paid by their employers according to their contract-defined wage, on the grounds of the “state of exception” that was officially declared by the government: faced with slashed turnovers by early March, numerous employers’ associations have immediately resorted to lay-offs, obligatory leaves without pay and/or fierce lobbying in favour of massive lockdowns.

More specifically:

By March 12/3 all private gyms were locked down, while the following day the measure was extended to include all restaurants (excl. take-aways and those providing delivery services) and bars. This measure had major impacts on (youth) employment, as most of the food and beverage sector numerous workers are young proletarians, who often work under precarious and intensified terms (unregistered or under-declared contracts, irregular week schedules etc.). By Wednesday 18/3, the measure was re-extended to almost the whole retail sector, with the obvious exclusion of sectors such as pharmacies, supermarkets, groceries, bakeries, banks, gas stations, take-aways and… funeral services. The workers employed in sectors related to medical equipment and/or products are now under a “zero hour contract”, as the shops remain closed, but the services can be provided by appointment only. Hostels and hotels are to follow by this week.

All those workers who have been directly affected by the official state “lockdown” measures, as well as those who got fired during the COVID-19 initial outbreak (since the beginning of March ca. 40,000 according to some reports, most of them in the tourist industry) or still work in very low profit businesses are entitled to receive a 800-euro “state benefit”, for the period from 15th of March till the end of April (that is 535 euros per month, well below the current minimum nominal wage of 650 euros). All beneficiaries are also qualified for a 40% rent discount, in case they have no property of their own and rent an apartment, though no details were given who is going to cover that 40% discount.

According to the state officials, the “locked-down” workers are not unemployed, but rather had “their work contracts suspended”, an alarming neologism that makes one wonder about what the actual legal consequences are, i.e. when capitalist “normality” is re-establshed will current contracts still remain valid? It’s no wonder that the “zero redundancy clause” legislated by the state for all companies that want to make use of state financial support, only ensures the nominal number of job positions, but not the type of work contract or, even more so, the corresponding wage related to those positions. For instance, it is yet unclear when workers with “suspended contracts” will receive the “Easter wage” (an extra wage amounting to 50% of the nominal wage that employers are forced by law to provide before the Easter vacations).

Apart from enjoying various credit, loan, tax, rent or other administrative facilitations (in the form of suspension of various payments for instance), the capitalists are also freed from the obligation to cover the social security liabilities of their “suspended” employees for as long as the ban is effective: the corresponding cost will also be funded by the state budget.

From the above, it must already be clear enough: what’s unfolding before our eyes is another crude attempt to socialize the capitalist losses, by channeling primary balance surplus money (that is money from working class’ direct and indirect wage decreases and income and purchases taxation etc.) straight to the capitalists’ pockets. The state money distribution is telling: out of the total package of 9.8bn euros (incl. 1.8 bn from the European Investment Fund and 6bn of guarantees to stimulate working capital corporate loans), the money directly channeled to the affected workers amount to only 0.45 bn or… 4.5%. Another important aspect of the current financial and social crisis is related to those already unemployed (1,076.134 by January 2020) and to unregistered workers. No special provisions for all those have been announced, apart from a 2-month extension of all unemployment benefits ending the first quarter of 2020 (ca. 200,000)

As all schools have been closed and grandparents, an integral and important part of the local familistic welfare regime, who have traditionally been providing childcare should not come in contact with children, new special leaves for parents with children under 15 years old were legislated. But only one parent can apply for such a leave and its cost (nominal wage and social security levies) is shared both by the employers (by 2/3) and the state (1/3): another straightforward way to socialize the capitalist costs. Workers who make use of this “special leave” have to simultaneously make use of their normal (paid) leave: for every 3 days of the special leave the worker applies, (s)he has to apply for 1 day of normal leave as well. That means if (s)he is not entitled to get “normal” leaves (this is the case for newly employed workers), then (s)he is not entitled to this special leave either. In any case, many were the cases of parents getting laid off only because they tried to get this special leave. Others were blackmailed to make use of their normal leaves or even to obligatorily get “a few days off” without pay.

But it is not just those who (temporarily or not) lost their jobs and wages who are directly affected by the new measures. Those still working may also find themselves in deep shit, as is the case for supermarket, supply chain/logistics/couriers/delivery and call-center workers, who all work under flexible schedules, unpaid overtimes, extremely intensified conditions and, as if the above are not already enough, without sufficient –if any– personal protective equipment. The latter was true for the whole period before the state bans and for all sectors nationwide: in most cases no guidelines were provided by the management on how to avoid getting infected while at work, or those guidelines were rather dated and/or inadequate. It’s not surprising that in many cases workers had to buy protective equipment themselves, a rather difficult task considering the huge public demand for gloves, masks and antiseptics (in many pharmacies long queues were observed and the protective equipment was sold out within hours if not minutes).

The government capitalized on people’s massive rush to supermarkets to buy protective equipment and other necessary products or food and decided to extend all supermarkets work schedule from 9am-9pm to 7am-10pm (Mondays–Saturdays), while supermarkers will obligatorily remain open on Sundays too (from 9am to 5pm). Regarding the latter, it’s worth noting that a number of workers on retail sector have been fighting against the legislation of Sunday-work since 2010 and it was only recently, according to the 2019 “development law”, that supermarkets were allowed to open up to 32 Sundays per year.

As a response to the above, a bunch of grassroots initiatives, among both supermarket and call-centers workers, are currently trying to expose the current working conditions of extreme intensification and/or the lack of protective measures. However, the working class general response to the overall state-led measures (535-euro state benefits instead of full wages, “suspended work contracts” etc.) has so far been disappointing, both in magnitude and content.

Regarding the administrative level:

According to the current state of affairs, the capitalists have no obligation to declare the daily working schedule of their employees to the waged-labour registration e-platform, by which they are (in theory at least) monitored by the Body of Labour Inspectors. This basically means that they can legally avoid declaring a worker, thus avoiding paying work-stamps, but it also means they can modify as they wish the type of contracts, work schedules, shifts and days-off to better suit their production needs. For instance, many cases of obligatory conversions of full-time to part-time contracts were reported. The capitalists can, moreover, avoid declaring overtimes, thus increasing their profits and workers’ exhaustion. While we all know that trying to bypass state labour legislature was commonplace among capitalists, it is worthwhile noting that it is the state itself that now allows such (previously) illegal practices. It’s not by accident, therefore, that one of the representatives of capital said «The job market works much better like that, when it’s more flexible».

It is through this condition of embedded flexibility that shift-work and remote-work –rather limited practices until now– have been introduced to a much larger scale in the local labour market, while the ban on almost all retail shops, has paved the way for the online (e-shop) services proliferation, as is the case for the related logistics sector.

The current situation among immigrants in detention centres

The situation among detained immigrants on the Greek islands can be described as rather chaotic. The 16th of March there was a fire in the migrant detention camp of Moria, in Lesvos, which led to the tragic death of a 6-year old child. The fire quickly got out of control due to the strong winds in the area, but also due to the fact that fire-fighting vehicles could not approach the site, as a result of the extremely overcrowded informal migrant settlements surrounding the facilities: while the infrastructure is said to have a capacity of 2,800 persons, the immigrants living there must be ca. 20,000-22,000! In total, more than 42,000 immigrants, including children, are trapped in Lesvos, Samos, Chios, Leros and Kos. In the beginning of February (that is, before the emergence of COVID-19) there was much talk about disease outbreak in the camps. The United Nations Refugee Agency has made an urgent call for the evacuation of Moria, as there is a threat of a pandemic outbreak that could affect the rest of the island: “Humans with severe breathing problems live inside tents which are wet because of moisture and the winter rains. There is no hot water at all and the detainees must wait for three hours in a cold environment to receive food. All of them are undernourished, with bleeding gums.” This is just a fraction of what is actually happening in Moria, according to the UN doctors that work there.

Dealing with such a bleak situation, the Greek government came to realize that a) you reap what you sow and b) you can’t rob Peter to pay Paul: after having waged an electoral campaign based on far-right, anti-immigrant rhetoric, it now finds itself obliged to simultaneously satisfy its electoral clientele on the islands, which demands “decongesting the islands from all immigrants” and “controlling immigrant presence” (i.e. it is no wonder that one of the very first measures that the new government had announced was the annulment of the asylum seekers’ social security number, which was granting them access to health services), and obey the current EU policy that dictates the creation of massive immigrant detention centers / ‘buffer zones’ at its borders, that is on the very same islands.

However, the government’s first attempt to move several immigrants from the detention centers to similar centers located in the mainland was met with huge local opposition there, mostly based on sheer xenophobic reflexes. The plan-b, then, was to construct more, larger enclosed detention centers on the islands and place in them those 42,000 people who have already been trapped there and all those that would attempt to cross the borders in the future. But this plan was also met with, even harsher actually, local reactions, mostly from the right but also from the left, as local interests (partly related to the touristic industry) would be affected. In February, locals fought fiercely against the government’s aim to turn those islands into permanent immigrant prisons by mere force (several riot police squads had been called out, only to make things worse as their presence unified local opposition against them). In the end the government was forced to back down.

After the end of the fight of the locals with the riot police squads and the military closure of the Greek-Turkish borders in early March, right-wing citizen initiatives have successfully managed to turn the local dissatisfaction with healthcare state provisions and state requisition of land for the new prisons into anti-immigrant and anti-NGO propaganda.

It is in this complicated and claustrophobic context, that the pandemic broke out and the immigrants were initially left to their own devices. Shortly afterwards, however, the government implemented harsh measures of mere biopolitical control, under the pretext of COVID-19 spread, despite the fact that all people infected so far are Greeks. In the detention centers in particular the only reported case of COVID-19 infections is that of a police officer in Amygdaleza, Attiki.

The strict legislature against detained immigrants include curfews, new fencing enclosures (around informal settlements) and solitary confinement areas for those that get infected, restricted transport permits to urban centers (in order to buy additional means of subsistence), ban on all indoors activities/meetings etc. However, what was not announced was the most effective preventive measure of all, that is the immediate shut down of all detention centers. More than ever, all of them now look like prisons! Despite that, the so-called Moria Corona Awareness Team, a group staffed by volunteers who have applied for asylum status, expressed its satisfaction for the (repressive) measures taken by the Greek authorities: “These restrictions are useful and necessary for refugees in order to be protected from coronavirus” and “for that we thank the Greeks who imposed the measures, and in a very peaceful way”!

In Kos island the mayor announced his intention to hire private security personnel so as to limit immigrants’ presence in a number of public spaces, thus resulting in even greater congregation within the detention centers, but also precluding similar measures to the nation-wide population.

As a matter of fact, the whole country starts looking like a prison: the Deputy Minister of Civil Protection and Crisis Management has recently announced the first martial law measure: the prohibition of all public gatherings of more than 10 people by 19/3, while offenders will be fined with 1,000 euros! This was soon followed by the lock down of all parks, public squares, hills and other recreational areas but also by the prohibition of all travels towards the islands for non-locals.

The continuous, on a daily basis actually, extension of such draconian and authoritative measures, which soon extend to ban all “unnecessary movement”, not only shows the state’s determination for greater control over social life, but it also reveals that it is the state itself that aims to further fuel the current pandemic of panic among citizens. For instance, according to the more recent measures, only 1 person per 15m2 is now allowed in supermarkets (compared to the 1 per 10m2 before), thus inciting even longer queues, let alone that such a strict rule is not applied in workplaces and prisons/detention centers… Day by day, measure after measure, people seem to get used to this abnormal and irrational “necessity”, according to which even the rip out of ordinary wooden benches from streets and squares seems reasonable. The government propaganda of “irresponsible citizens who disobey quarantine” has proven to be, partially at least, successful in that in certain cases locals in rural areas and small towns have greeted visitors from urban centers with suspicion, if not hostility.

The current situation in prisons

There has been an horizontal ban on both granted leaves (i.e. days-off prison for those prisoners who have completed at least 1/5 of their sentence) and the so-called «free visits» (i.e. open meetings of detainees with their relatives in prison facilities without strict time limits). The short meetings (only 10 to 15-minute long) that initially were allowed behind glass windows are banned, too. On top of that, food, clothes and other (such as books) packages from relatives were prohibited. Barriers in lawyer visits have also been reported. On top of that, the Ministry of Public Order has recommended the use of isolated areas in every prison, each being capable of accommodating 10-20 COVID-19 infected (or potentially infected) inmates. However, the prison managers have already stated their inability to implement such a measure, due to prison overcrowding.

Female detainees have publicized a text, which was communicated through lawyers to the Ministry stating that they are both cooperative and strictly compliant with some of the above measures and that, from their part, «there is a great deal of responsibility». They demanded that the political leadership show responsibility, too, and accept their proposals, among which are releasing all inmates convicted with less than 5 years of imprisonment, as well as releasing all incarnated mothers with underage children and those who are vulnerable to COVID-19 infection. Similar demands were also made by the Prisoners’ Rights Initiative, mostly focusing on the need to secure safe life-conditions within prisons and decrease overpopulation both in prisons and police detention centers, by means of on-parole releases and other similar policies.

Protests

The last big demonstration in the country took place on the island of Lesvos on March 14. It was an anti-fascist/pro-immigration demo which was supported by the local Hospital Doctors’ Union and was accused of “irresponsibility” by the government supporters all over the country.

The only call for strike this week was issued by the Union of Archaeologists who demanded to stop working, a demand that was met by the Ministry of Culture.

A collective hunger-strike, of more than 1,200 immigrants detained in Korinthos detention camp has been initiated by March 20, protesting against the harsh living conditions, also demanding to be freed. Whether this protest was mostly related to the UN anti-racism day (21/3) or extends further than that, remains unclear at the moment.

After dark, there are more cops in the streets than ordinary people. If there’s going to be a curfew this weekend or next week, it will be very difficult for comrades who are still active to get together or put their banners, stickers etc over the city of Athens.

Assembly of Workers-Unemployed from Syntagma Square

TPTG

March 22, 2020

 

Το κείμενο σε pdf

 

Μετάφραση στα γαλλικά στο site dndf (με τη σωστή, πλήρη υπογραφή στο τέλος του κειμένου)

 

Αναρτήθηκε από: Τα παιδιά της γαλαρίας | 22 Μαρτίου 2020

Η συμβολή μας στον κριτικό σχολιασμό του κειμένου του Floris D’ Aalst “Whither America?” στο Insurgent Notes, # 19

Some thoughts on Whither America?

Floris’s text, notwithstanding certain disagreements from our part, has the merit of covering a wide range of issues, with each one of these requiring a separate analysis in order to be dealt with properly. Therefore, we deliberately left out of our commentary certain aspects of US reality, not because we regard them unimportant but because we focused on what constitutes our basic line of argumentation in relation to the points of divergence with Floris’s text.      

We largely agree with his theoretical explanations on the industrial decline in the US, however, we consider it to be only a part of a broader historical process that we call a crisis of reproduction of the capitalist social relations dating from the late 60’s – early 70’s.

This period witnessed the beginning of the decomposition of capital-labour relations in the West, as they were consolidated after the war, with Keynesianism, as a model of domination and disciplining-integrating class antagonisms, reaching its limits because of wildcat strikes, urban riots, sabotage, absenteeism, high turnover, the subjective (at times even individualist) revolt against social privileges and state regulations of all kinds, in short a revolt against inflexible models of work in factories and offices and oppressive reproductive models in society at large.

Equally important with what the text says about the falling rate of profit because of the rise in the organic composition of capital were the wage rises as a result of labour insubordination, because of which the extraction of surplus value became more expensive.

Apart from the rise of the direct cost of exploitation, what was new in this period, historically speaking, was the rise of the indirect cost of exploitation, the expenses of the welfare state. Since the capitalist state, as a welfare state, incorporated more and more aspects of everyday life, the alienated social organization, society as a factory, generated movements against state control and around education, housing, health, transportation, consumer models etc. It was the period when the struggles of wageless housewives, the ethnic minorities, the so-called “surplus population”, for more benefits and less control came to the fore. It was through these struggles that the contradictory relation between the working-class and the welfare state became obvious: the increase in benefits presupposes subordination to the alienating form of the capitalist state, but it was the state itself that had become a terrain of class antagonism and its control was crushed from within.

The struggles in the factory to disconnect wages from productivity and for control over the labour process and the struggles of proletarian subjects such as blacks, women and the unemployed for increases in social benefits, for income without work, were the two sides of the same coin, of the same revolt.

The welfare state came under a crisis, being blamed for causing the crisis itself. The focal points of the new strategy of capital’s counterattack were the restructuring of state expenses and the production sphere, the strengthening of the police functions of the state and the deepening of divisions within the working class. The crisis of the welfare state or else the “fiscal crisis of the state” was the outcome of the social and class struggles over state expenses.

We had to dwell on that because we think that Floris’s argument that “large capitalist concerns no longer accepted the social wage and supported the social welfare state” (p.3), is insufficient in order to describe the crisis of the capitalist state itself when its basic but contradictory functions, the capitalist accumulation and the legitimization of the capitalist relations, came to an acute crisis. We think that his text underestimates the role of the capitalist welfare state as the most powerful agent of capitalist activity and at the same time the mediator of class struggles and it fails to present it as the irreversible historical result of the post-war class compromise on western democracies until nowadays.

It’s also misleading, in the sense that instead of presenting neoliberalism as a capitalist strategy of both political forms of capital in US politics (Republicans/Democrats, right-wing/liberal), as political forms of capital faced with the crisis, in the text it is only the “Neo-Right” that it is identified with the neoliberal program.

Actually, in the first period of the capitalist counterattack, in the late 70’s, Keynesianism was replaced by a monetarist, deflationary politics. It was J. Carter, of the Democratic Party and Volcker as head of the Federal Reserve, the ones who applied monetaristic, deflationary politics through the restriction of money supply to curb inflation (an underlying reason of which was, among other factors, the power of the working class to increase the direct and indirect wage). Starting with the bank and municipal attack against the New York City working class in the mid 70’s, it was the Democratic Party that inaugurated neoliberalism with a series of anti-Keynesianist policies aiming at the destruction of the local and federal states’ old redistributive function. The first major cutbacks in federal social spending were imposed through Carter’s administration’s budget for 1980 “which called for “austerity” and “restraint” in the provision of government services. While defense spending, social security, and health-care payments were increased (the latter two because the benefits are tied by law to the rate of inflation), other programs were level-funded or cut. The 1981 budget continued these trends, with increases for defense spending and austerity for domestic programs; the Reagan administration’s economic program only accelerated these shifts in the public sector.”

So, although it’s true that capital’s counter-attack escalated by the Reagan administration, it had already started earlier during the 70’s: the new conservatives of both the Republican and the Democratic parties launched an ideology and a practice that combined individualism and economic “rationalization”, reaching to social inequality as a supposedly natural human condition, thus disciplining the working-class by deepening the divisions within it. Instrumental for this was an “attack” on the Big State, “particularly the distant, unresponsive bureaucracies of the federal government, … a crucial element in eroding support for the regulatory and social-wage elements of the state, and for building support for the pro growth and military-spending elements”.

But if neither the content of neoliberalism can be attributed exclusively to the Neo-Right’s program, as the text claims, nor its origin dates back in Reagan era, then a disproportionately long analysis of the New Right is hardly necessary, if not confusing. On the contrary, what is missing from a revolutionary perspective is what the limits of the social and class struggles were then and how both political forms of capital helped consolidate the neoliberal policies and ideology.

For example, was the “tax revolt” just a “‘single issue’ rightist ‘social issues’ struggle”? More generally, didn’t the 1978 changes in the federal income and payroll taxes further accelerate the inequality of the tax structure with capital gains taxed more lightly under the personal income act, while rates were increased on wages and salaries below certain maximums? Wasn’t the property tax a very regressive tax, favoring mostly the wealthy ones? The more well-to-do segments of the working class (whether right-wing or liberal) got involved in the interclassist movement for tax cuts and it would be very interesting to show how “the Right used it as a wedge to cut business taxes and taxes for the wealthy, as well as social services”, that is how parts of the bourgeoisie used the anger and insecurity of an increasingly threatened working class to create a movement that favored them and how they promoted cuts in expenditures that attacked first the weakest parts of the class and in the long term even those parts of the class that were involved in the “tax revolt”.

Furthermore, would it be possible for the conservative anti-proletarian, “populist” and individualistic propaganda to gain ground, if the power of the organized working-class had not been already undermined by the liberals on the city and state levels and if the ability of the working class to fight on its own terrain (i.e. the practical critique of the wage relation in all its dimensions) had not been undermined by the left liberal citizen-action, public-interest groups and the practice of citizenism in general?

The long history of neoliberalism from the 1970s up till now had its ups and downs. It was not an even historical process culminating in Trump, as Floris suggests.

Reagan was successful in attacking labour legislation favorable to workers and through tax cuts made it easier for capital to relocate from the unionized “rust belt” to the non-unionized southern or western regions of the country (even abroad to Mexico and Southeastern Asia) or reorganize itself in other areas of the economy or new companies free of unions and collective bargaining – a process which continued during the Bush and Clinton’s administration. But as Harry Cleaver had noted,

“Although, once again, as in the 1970s there were successes in cutting social programs, especially in the first year of the first Reagan Administration, there were also failures. The defensive counter-mobilization of a wide variety of targeted groups, from those defending food stamps for the poor to those defending social security for the middle class, succeeded in preventing much of what had been slated for elimination under Reagan’s supply-side program. Given the successful resistance to such cuts, the Reagan program of reduced taxes but not-adequately-reduced expenditures produced a skyrocketing budget deficit which could only be funded by massive foreign borrowing from Europe and Japan. The result was that when business discontent over the depression and over federal crowding-out in money markets combined with the threat of Mexico to default in the debt crisis, Volcker was forced to ease up on monetary policy and lower interest rates in the Fall of 1982. When he did so, his explicit emphasis was on stimulating consumption, not investment. The long slow recovery that followed had something of a Keynesian flavor to it, much to the distaste of monetarists and supply-siders. The fact that the pattern of unemployment, income tax cuts and financial deregulation had had the effect of shifting money income from waged workers to salaried workers and managers – financing the yuppy generation – meant that this “consumption-led» recovery was based on a new class composition, but it was not the investment-led growth envisaged by the supply-side policy makers”.

Despite the growing importance of productive investments in the reorganization of information flows, science and technology, vast amounts of money were re-deployed in the direction of paper and speculative (stock market and real estate market) investments. This move by industrial concerns had the merit of restoring profit rates and atomizing workers through credit but could not strengthen the link between money and extraction of surplus value, with the result of continuous financial bubbles since 1987.

Clinton’s presidency was the era of extreme financialization and neoliberal populism; workfare was introduced and the social security system was largely privatized.

The Clinton years witnessed a continuation of neo-liberal policies by signing up to NAFTA, slashing welfare (with the welfare reform bill that dismantled the federal welfare system known as Aid to Families With Dependent Children (AFDC)) and abandoning federal assistance to the old industrial “heartland” in favour of the computer and information industries in the South and West. On the other hand, the median household income increase in African-American households (by 25 percent, twice as fast as it did for all households nationwide) during that time, together with African-American unemployment rate fall (from 14.1 percent to 8.2 percent) simply meant that class divisions within black population deepened. With the US having the highest rate of incarceration in the world when Clinton left office in 2001 (because of the 1994 crime bill, with its three-strikes provision and increased number of capital crimes) and African-Americans constituting 80 to 90 percent of all drug offenders sent to prison, the true jobless rate for young, non-college-educated black men, including those behind bars, was 42 percent as government statistics on poverty and unemployment rates did not include incarcerated people. Clinton’s period best exemplifies the expansion of the penal side of the welfare state if we take into account that funding for public housing got slashed by $17 billion (a reduction of 61 percent), while funding for corrections was boosted by $19 billion (an increase of 171 percent); this transformation, according to sociologist Loïc Wacquant, “effectively makes the construction of prisons the nation’s main housing program for the urban poor.”

Direct wages (both minimum wage and salaries) were increased during the second Clinton Administration, but thanks to the expulsion of 6 million people from welfare, the slashing of housing benefits and the everyday practice of dismissing those workers who were involved in the organization of trade unions and workers’ groups (10,000 every year), the only beneficiaries of this increase were salaried workers and the managerial strata of the working class, who were also considered to be credit-worthy.

After the bubble of the so-called “New Economy” burst in 2000, there followed a period which could be described as a form of “military Keynesianism” i.e., the use of government funds directed to the military to stimulate economic activity in a period of decreasing private investment and profitability. This mixture of neoliberalism (privatization) and Keynesian deficit spending to get and keep US capital out of a crisis and at the same time, the promise of non-union jobs in a hugely expanded and privatized “national security” sector to some citizen workers while further driving immigrant workers into illegality, or else the “Bush Deal”, had as key parts the Patriot Act and the Homeland Security Act. They were components of a strategy of increased expenditure combined with the guarantee of not strengthening the working class through a massive use of non-union private contractors. In essence, the “war on terrorism” was a strategy of a dramatic transformation of class relations and the temporary reversal of the profitability crisis. It was also a means to reaffirm the monopoly of US dollar as the main reserve currency. Therefore, it is in this framework that we put the importance of the 9/11 events and not in an abstract critique of “national mythology”.

The reduction in interest rates and the loosening of credit was even greater after the collapse of the “New Economy” in 2001 and this kind of “privatized Keynesianism” was extended to more and more people who were encouraged to borrow to sustain demand. Gradually, the disciplining/divisive role of the debt expansion was seriously undermined in the years before the 2007 subprime mortgage crisis as speculative investments in the derivative markets connected with consumer and mortgage debt got autonomized, thus leading to a total relaxation of the rules and criteria for providing credit: even unemployed black families were able to get mortgage loans.

Consequently, the bursting of these new bubbles in the beginning of 2008 brought the global banking system on the verge of total collapse and the global economy in deep recession. The US government under Obama chose to deal with this situation through the even greater burgeoning of the “sovereign debt” with the provision of astronomical sums of money to bail out banks and boost capitalist growth. The use of trillions of dollars of government funds to take control of the banking sector and the demand of a specific restructuring of the auto industry were urgently undertaken among “a wide spectrum of actions that appear[ed] ‘collectivist,’ ‘socialist’ and ‘commonist’ to a doctrinaire neoliberal”, since Obama’s administration also saw as its duty to help reverse the legitimacy crisis of the capitalist state brought about by the meltdown in 2008 while bringing the economy back to its pre-crisis state. Neoliberal trends continued as usual and “the number of US families living under the World Bank’s global poverty line (2 dollars per person, per day) more than doubled since the mid-1990s, reaching 1.5 million households in 2011”. Unsurprisingly, therefore, in the supposedly “post-racial” era under an African-American president, deportation of undocumented immigrants was more than 2.5 million and police murders of predominantly black proletarians increased.

Trump enters the picture when the previous administrations’ failure to reverse capitalist profitability crisis for certain capitalist fractions and mitigate the consequences of neoliberal policies for large swathes of the working class reached a point that could seriously endanger the reproduction of capitalist relations.

Therefore, it is important to repeat what several comrades have stressed so far, that it was primarily a defeat of Clinton rather than a victory of Trump, relativizing his supposed electoral “triumph” as a contingent response to Obama’s neo-liberal political economy.  Consequently, we view Trump more as an expression of the predicament capital finds itself in and of working-class frustration than as the “deepening” or the “culmination” of a “neo-Right political culture, nascently neo-liberal and, today, more or less openly neo-fascist”, as Floris says. The “anti-establishment” stance he tried to take during his campaign (mobilizing the electoral base of the Republicans to a large extent against the party apparatus) and his populist narrative indicate a deep crisis within the political forms of mediation in the US politics (in both the Republican and the Democrat Party) rather than a homogeneous strengthened neo-Right, as Floris asserts.

While we do not underestimate Trump’s effort to normalize white supremacy, sexism and militarism, we find it more productive to question the material basis of the racist deal that he seemed to offer to the (“white”) working-class before his election. It is there, however, that we note that instead of keeping the long list of promises he gave (as a candidate) to a deeply disillusioned working-class (raising of taxes on the rich; tax changes that would not benefit the rich; breaking up of the largest US banks by reinstating old Glass-Steagall regulations; price controls on prescription drugs; a $1 trillion infrastructure package etc), what Trump and his cabinet have so far accomplished is that a whole program of regular right-wing demands stalled for decades has been turned into law within a very short time (the tax bill, that has dramatically reduced the corporate tax rate; environmental deregulation, increase in the military budget, charter school proliferation, defunding of the Consumer Financial Protection Agency etc).

This standard boiler-plate from the right-wing agenda since the New Deal will hardly satisfy the less well-to-do segments of what, according to Floris, constitutes a “neo-fascist oppositional bloc” and we could also risk suggesting that its working-class segment will feel very alienated if not betrayed at the end of Trump’s presidency. Couldn’t one also predict that these standard neo-liberal “accomplishments” will make Trump’s cabinet “redundant”?

For all these reasons we concur with dissenting voices in the American Left, like Phil Neel, who wrote that

“the majority party in the U.S. is the party of non-voters. This is particularly true among the poor. And this shouldn’t be a great mystery, either. People aren’t really that dumb, and it’s not terribly hard to see that neither major party offers anything to anyone other than the rich and those within its patronage network. Talking to people from these places [the “far” hinterland, which is “a sort of abandoned zone, dominated by informal work and black markets”] you definitely see support for Trump—often almost exclusively out of spite for spineless liberals—but for every Trump supporter you’ll find two people who say fuck both parties, they don’t have our interests in mind. And remember that rural America is nowhere near exclusively white, either… As a “material force,” Trump is not particularly important. He obviously cannot offer any sort of true economic revival, because he’s not able to put through the type of severe tariffs and massive public projects that would be necessary to do so (albeit temporarily). The trade policy he’s pursued has been haphazard at best. In the social sphere, there’s a lot of talk about how he “enables” these far-right mass movements, but the evidence is actually quite mixed. Generally, far-right mass movements tend to grow fastest and strongest under center-left Democratic regimes, because they thrive off these confrontations with an unpopular federal government… And here is the real meat of the issue: when you actually compare the data, you see that Democratic regimes were obviously not much better, and there’s no reason to assume that the Democratic alternative would have been any different”.

Even more certain is that there can be no historical analogy with fascism. We have major disagreements with Floris on what historical fascism was and even more so on its resemblance with the modern capitalist regime, however, as a proper analysis would be too long for this text, we will just confine ourselves to some short comments. There are no “structural similarities” between the neo-liberal US state and the Nazi state. The Nazi regime was a state capitalist economy, a “closed commercial state”, characterized by protectionist tariffs, full employment and a state-subsidized domestic industrial and agricultural production. The Nazi government had tried to keep peasants tied to their land and there were also regulations against working class mobility between industries. What is more, German society under Nazis was a racist Volksgemeinschaft, totally different from the individualist American society which is characterized, as Floris rightly observes, by inter-racial educational institutions that develop “de-racialized sensitivities” and institutions like affirmative action. Moreover, in German society under Nazis there were only hidden forms of working class resistance because there was no freedom of press and collective action. Finally, the German national capital tried to solve its lingering overaccumulation crisis, by violently exporting it to other countries, leading to the massive devalorization of constant and variable capital alike during the world war II massacre.

However, since then the capitalist accumulation, seen as a whole, has evolved into incorporating globalized networks of surplus value extraction, supply/consumption and financing. In that sense, the de-industrialization of the West and the rapid massive accumulation of fixed capital in Eastern Asia are connected, both reflecting the new division of labour exploitation on the global scale that emerged as a temporary spatio-temporal fix to the crisis of reproduction of capitalist relations in the West. The current dynamics of valorization/devalorization strongly depend on the cooperation of the capitalist class to set up such fixes, interconnecting local regimes of accumulation to ever greater degree. It is this very material basis of labour exploitation under capitalist relations that prevent us from seeing a direct linkage between current “tariff or trade wars”, to the extent that these are actual intercapitalist “wars”, and a “renewed imperialist world war”.

So-called “tariff wars” should also be examined under the perspective of simultaneous intra-capitalist competition and cooperation. Trump’s tariff-based policy, focusing on bilateral agreements that would largely favour the US, seem to have been halted by temporary agreements with EU and Canada, while, and this is equally important, such protectionist policies may be beneficial to all trading sides, to a certain degree at least. For instance, the Chinese government has long been pursuing a more balanced accumulation model (both investment and internal consumption-driven), in response to the rising production costs in China due to working class unrest and as a tactical shift to partially disengage local production from (currently largely) unstable global demand.

Finally, we can’t see what’s the use of the dystopian science fiction, apocalyptic totalitarian scenario that Floris presents at the end of his text. If it is true that the far-right organises localist self-reliance initiatives in areas faced with declining government services, thus bypassing the central issue of exploitation, then the only solution still remains the autonomous multiracial, multi-gendered organization of the working class around the central issue of work and wages. What are the possibilities of strengthening such universalist organizations both in workplaces and the sphere of reproduction? What are, for example, the prospects and the dynamics of the multiracial, multi-gendered Fight for $15 movement? Is it an independent working class movement or a public relations movement under the patronage of the Democrats and DSA? From a revolutionary point of view, such, among others, would be for us a more productive and grounded attitude towards the real movement of our times, instead of highly questionable, apocalyptic hypothetical series of events on which, moreover, proletarian organization seems to have no influence whatsoever.

TPTG

January 2019

A theoretical postcript

Our modest analysis in the form of the above short and incomplete comments has been informed by the theoretical assumption that currency issues and trade-currency wars are mystified forms of appearance of problems that arise within the relations of production, i.e. within the relations of exploitation. Money is neither a simple means of trading and profit accumulation, nor is it a simple mechanism for regulating production. Money is the most abstract, capitalist form of social wealth; it is the contradictory, mystifying social power through which social reproduction is subject to capitalist reproduction. Behind the US effort to support the dollar and make money out of money lies the inability of capital to increase work productivity in a way other than reducing the cost through redundancies. Trump’s decisions, like those of his predecessors, show the inability to create a new model of exploitation of labour and integration of the whole working class without at the same time encouraging its demands; in other words, they show the failure to impose a productive and profitable disciplining of the working class. On the other hand, competition among different forms of capital or between companies or even national capitals is not the essence of capitalism; it is one of the ways of sharing the total socially produced surplus value (another way is the co-operation of the individual capitals). Because labour is forced to produce surplus value under the dictate of capital as a whole, the strongest capitals – national or supra-national ones- do not only aim at increasing their individual profits, but, most importantly, they try to achieve this by promoting their own overall solution to the problems of global surveillance, exploitation and reproduction of the planetary labour power. Thus, although true that the overall strategy of capital emerges through competition, the obsession of anti-imperialists (whether left or liberal) with inter-capitalist conflict conceals the real content of this conflict: the joint domination of many capitals over the undisciplined labour powers.

pdf

http://insurgentnotes.com/2019/02/some-thoughts-on-whither-america/

 

Αναρτήθηκε από: Τα παιδιά της γαλαρίας | 2 Μαρτίου 2019

ΕΚΔΗΛΩΣΗ-ΣΥΖΗΤΗΣΗ

Anarxikoi-es_stegastro-20190120-taxikoi_agones-WEB

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Συμμετέχουμε στην

ΕΚΔΗΛΩΣΗ

ΤΑΞΙΚΟΙ ΑΓΩΝΕΣ ΣΤΟΝ ΕΛΛΑΔΙΚΟ ΧΩΡΟ

αναρχικές και κομμουνιστικές τάσεις

η τομή από την κατοχή και τον εμφύλιο πόλεμο

τα επίδικα σήμερα

ΜΕ ΑΦΟΡΜΗ ΤΗ ΔΙΑΚΛΑΔΙΚΗ ΑΠΕΡΓΙΑ ΤΩΝ ΠΡΩΤΟΒΑΘΜΙΩΝ ΣΩΜΑΤΕΙΩΝ ΤΗΝ 1/11/2018

ΚΥΡΙΑΚΗ 20/01/2019

15:00 – ΠΡΩΤΟΣ ΚΥΚΛΟΣ ΤΟΠΟΘΕΤΗΣΕΩΝ

        * ΝΙΚΟΣ ΠΕΛΕΚΟΥΔΑΣ

Η πρώτη σπορά – Σοσιαλιστικές και αναρχικές ομάδες στην Ελλάδα 1877-1907

(Ακυβέρνητες Πολιτείες, 2017)

        * ΝΙΚΟΣ ΠΑΠΑΧΡΙΣΤΟΠΟΥΛΟΣ

Η μόρφωσις των εργατών

(Opportuna, 2018)

16:30 – ΔΕΥΤΕΡΟΣ ΚΥΚΛΟΣ ΤΟΠΟΘΕΤΉΣΕΩΝ

        * ΦΏΤΗΣ ΚΑΤΕΒΑΣ

Τα βουνά προηγούνται – Η Φιλοπρόοδος Ένωση Καροπλεσίου Αγράφων μέσα από

το αρχείο του Γιάννη Κοσπεντάρη (1933-1936)

(Ευτοπία, 2017)

        * ΣΤΕΡΓΙΟΣ ΚΑΤΣΑΡΟΣ

Εγώ ο προβοκατόρας, ο τρομοκράτης – Η γοητεία της βίας

(Ισνάφι, 2η έκδοση, 2008 / Μαύρη Λίστα, 1η έκδοση, 1999)

18:00 – ΤΡΙΤΟΣ ΚΥΚΛΟΣ ΤΟΠΟΘΕΤΗΣΕΩΝ

        * ΘΟΔΩΡΗΣ ΠΙΣΙΜΙΣΗΣ

Περιοδικό Αντιπληροφόρηση – Πρώτος Τόμος: 1975-1977: Τεύχη 1-11 /

Δεύτερος Τόμος: 1977-1978: Τεύχη 12-20 / Τρίτος Τόμος: 1978-1979: Τεύχη

21-26 – Μια αρχειακή-ιστορική καταγραφή ενός μέρους του επιθετικού

πολιτικού λόγου της μεταπολίτευσης

(Γραφές, 2003)

        * ΤΑ ΠΑΙΔΙΑ ΤΗΣ ΓΑΛΑΡΙΑΣ

Τεύχος 18: Αφιερωμένο στους «κριτικούς» συνοδοιπόρους της εξουσίας (της

κάθε εξουσίας)

19:30 – ΤΕΤΑΡΤΟΣ ΚΥΚΛΟΣ ΤΟΠΟΘΕΤΗΣΕΩΝ

         * ΣΩΜΑΤΕΙΟ ΣΕΡΒΙΤΟΡΩΝ ΜΑΓΕΙΡΩΝ ΚΑΙ ΛΟΙΠΩΝ ΕΡΓΑΖΟΜΕΝΩΝ ΤΟΥ ΚΛΑΔΟΥ ΤΟΥ ΕΠΙΣΙΤΙΣΜΟΥ (ΣΣΜ)

         * ΣΩΜΑΤΕΙΟ ΒΑΣΗΣ ΕΡΓΑΖΟΜΕΝΩΝ ΣΤΙΣ ΜΚΟ (ΣΒΕΜΚΟ)

         * ΣΥΝΕΛΕΥΣΗ ΒΑΣΗΣ ΕΡΓΑΖΟΜΕΝΩΝ ΟΔΗΓΩΝ ΔΙΚΥΚΛΟΥ (ΣΒΕΟΔ)

         * ΣΥΝΕΛΕΥΣΗ ΑΝΕΡΓΩΝ ΚΑΙ ΕΡΓΑΖΟΜΕΝΩΝ ΤΗΛΕΦΩΝΗΤ(ΡΙ)ΩΝ PROLEDIALERS

         * ΤΑΞΙΚΟ ΜΕΤΩΠΟ – ΠΡΩΤΟΒΟΥΛΙΑ ΕΡΓΑΖΟΜΕΝΩΝ ΣΤΙΣ ΣΥΓΚΟΙΝΩΝΙΕΣ

Αυτοδιαχειριζόμενο κοινωνικό στέκι Γαλατσίου στέγ★

Πρόσβαση με ΜΜΜ: 5, 15 στάση «Φούρνος», 054 στάση «Φωκά»

————————-

ΑΝΑΡΧΙΚΟΙ/ΕΣ ΑΠΟ ΤΟ ΣΤΕΓΑΣΤΡΟ

Αναρτήθηκε από: Τα παιδιά της γαλαρίας | 13 Ιανουαρίου 2019

ΕΚΔΗΛΩΣΗ-ΣΥΖΗΤΗΣΗ

ΠΑΡΟΥΣΙΑΣΗ ΤΟΥ ΤΕΥΧΟΥΣ 18 ΑΠΟ

ΤΑ ΠΑΙΔΙΑ ΤΗΣ ΓΑΛΑΡΙΑΣ

στον αυτοδιαχειριζόμενο χώρο Ανατόπια,

Τσαμαδού 81 και Καραϊσκάκη, Πάτρα

Σάββατο, 9 Ιουνίου, 20.00

 

tptg

 

pdf

 

Αναρτήθηκε από: Τα παιδιά της γαλαρίας | 7 Ιουνίου 2018

Κυκλοφόρησε το νέο τεύχος του περιοδικού Τα Παιδιά της Γαλαρίας, # 18

Τεύχος 18: Αφιερωμένο στους «κριτικούς» συνοδοιπόρους της εξουσίας (της κάθε εξουσίας)

 

GALARIA18-EXFsite

 

 

Περιεχόμενα

 

ΠΡΟΛΟΓΙΚΟ ΣΗΜΕΙΩΜΑ

–O πραγματικός εχθρός, Μπερνάρ, είναι αυτή η άγρια ειδωλολατρική φυλή που ζητάει μεγαλύτερους μισθούς, σέρνει τα πόδια της στους χώρους εργασίας και εχθρεύεται τους συνδικαλιστές και τα πολιτικά κόμματα. Ο παγκόσμιος εσωτερικός εχθρός. Αυτούς είναι που πρέπει να πλαισιώσουμε με τις οργανώσεις μας, τα social media και τις πολιτικές της ταυτότητας, οποιασδήποτε ταυτότητας, εθνικής ή καταναλωτικής. Και πάνω απ’ όλα πρέπει να τους έχουμε ενταγμένους στη λαϊκο-δημοκρατική πολιτική, οποιαδήποτε λαϊκο-δημοκρατική πολιτική αρκεί να μην μπορούν να εκφραστούν σε μια δική τους δημόσια σφαίρα που θα μας γράφει στα παλιά της τα παπούτσια επειδή δεν θα μπορούμε να μιλήσουμε τη γλώσσα των αναγκών τους.

–Αββά, μιλάς σοφά!

Αββάς ντε Περινιόν, Στα Υπόγεια του Βατικανού

Ο βασικότερος λόγος για τη συγγραφή ενός νέου τεύχους των Παιδιών της Γαλαρίας –τέσσερα χρόνια μετά την έκδοση του τελευταίου τεύχους– ήταν η αναγκαιότητα απάντησης σε έναν διαδεδομένο μύθο που η διαρκής επανάληψή του μέσα στο «χώρο» έχει συσκοτίσει τα πράγματα: ότι η άνοδος του Σύριζα στην εξουσία ήταν το αποτέλεσμα μιας προηγηθείσας ήττας του «αντιμνημονιακού κινήματος». Μια παραλλαγή αυτής της λανθασμένης εκτίμησης είναι, για παράδειγμα, η άποψη του John Holloway και των συνεργατών του ότι η «αποτυχία» του Σύριζα να γίνει το αντίβαρο στο νεοφιλελευθερισμό είναι διπλή αποτυχία της θεσμικής αριστεράς και του κινήματος (λες και αυτά τα δύο ταυτίζονταν – πράγμα που δεν ισχύει ιδιαίτερα για την περίοδο πριν από τον Φλεβάρη του 2012). Υπάρχουν κι άλλες παραλλαγές αυτού του μύθου: ότι το κίνημα το 2012 ήταν ακόμα σε διαδικασία εδραίωσης εναλλακτικών δομών και τη διαδικασία αυτή την εξέτρεψε η συνειδητή χρήση των εκλογών από το κεφάλαιο, που δική του επιλογή ήταν ο Σύριζα κι άλλες τέτοιες αστειότητες.

Η άνοδος του Σύριζα στην εξουσία το 2015 και η εδραίωσή του στο τιμόνι του έθνους-κράτους δεν σηματοδοτεί την ήττα ή την αποτυχία του «αντιμνημονιακού κινήματος». Σηματοδοτεί τη νίκη του. Για να ακριβολογούμε, τη νίκη της κυρίαρχης τάσης του. Το κίνημα ήταν ένα κατά βάση λαϊκο-δημοκρατικό, αντιφασιστικό κίνημα που πίστευε ότι «η χούντα δεν τελείωσε το ’73» και ήθελε να εμποδίσει την άνοδο της χ.α. στην εξουσία δίπλα στο «μαύρο μέτωπο» των μνημονίων, εκδημοκρατίζοντας ταυτόχρονα το κράτος με την ένταξη σ’ αυτό αμεσοδημοκρατικών και συνεταιριστικών δομών. Ο Σύριζα ήταν, λοιπόν, ο πραγματικός ορίζοντάς του, ως συμπύκνωση και έκφραση των βασικών του χαρακτηριστικών, όπως οι παλαιστινιακές εθνικοαπελευθερωτικές οργανώσεις είναι ο ορίζοντας των αγώνων του παλαιστινιακού «λαού», το ΡΚΚ του κουρδικού, οι Αδελφοί Μουσουλμάνοι του αιγυπτιακού και πάει λέγοντας. Κι αν ακόμα ο Σύριζα δεν υπήρχε, ο δημοκρατικός κόσμος του κινήματος –οι «λαϊκές συνελεύσεις», η νέα επιχειρηματικότητα, τα διαμαρτυρόμενα εναντίον των μνημονίων άτομα-πολίτες– θα έπρεπε να τον εφεύρει.

Το γεγονός ότι κανένας φιλοσυριζέος δεν είναι σήμερα ικανοποιημένος δεν οφείλεται στο αιώνιο ανικανοποίητο της ανθρώπινης φύσης ή στο ότι ο Σύριζα «απέτυχε», αλλά στη δυσάρεστη υπενθύμιση ότι, σε περίοδο υποχώρησης της ταξικής πάλης, η πολιτική δεν είναι, ούτε καν σχετικά, αυτόνομη από τον κυρίαρχο καπιταλιστικό τρόπο παραγωγής. Μόλις είπαμε την κακή λέξη που πολλοί ήθελαν να ξορκίσουν από το κίνημα: «καπιταλισμός». Πράγματι, τι κρίμα που τα όμορφα δημοκρατικά και συνεταιριστικά-μαγαζατορικά όνειρα πρέπει να συντρίβονται πάνω στους υφάλους της καπιταλιστικής πραγματικότητας και των «οικονομικών δεικτών» που αν δεν «βελτιωθούν» καμία «έξοδος από τα μνημόνια δεν είναι εφικτή» – όπως ακούραστα επαναλαμβάνει η κυβέρνηση του «λαού»!

Δόθηκε μάχη για να περιθωριοποιηθεί εντός του κινήματος η ταξική προοπτική από τα κάτω –αυτή είναι η μόνη ήττα που εμείς ξέρουμε ότι έλαβε χώρα τα τελευταία χρόνια– και οι ευγενικές δημοκρατικές ψυχές του κινήματος αναγκάζονται να υφίστανται τις συνέπειες αυτής της περιθωριοποίησης κάθε μέρα – ως συνεχιζόμενο ταξικό-μνημονιακό πόλεμο οργανωμένο από τα πάνω, από τη δεξιά και την αριστερά του κεφαλαίου! Και καλά η «εξέγερση από τα δεξιά»: αυτή μπορεί πάντα να βρει ένα επαρκές ιδεολογικό καταφύγιο για την απογοήτευσή της στον Αμβρόσιο και τις ελληνικές σημαιούλες. Αλλά η δημοκρατική «εξέγερση από τα αριστερά»; Που δεν μπορεί να ικανοποιηθεί μόνο από το γεγονός ότι δεν είναι προσωρινά στην κυβέρνηση η κακιά, «αντιδραστική» δεξιά; Που βλέπει να μην μπορούν να αξιοποιηθούν όπως θα έπρεπε τα (αντιρατσιστικά, αντισεξιστικά, τεχνοκρατικά) διδακτορικά της και τα μαγαζιά της στην αγορά; Αναγκάζεται να βολευτεί προσωρινά όπως μπορεί (στις ΜΚΟ, στις ΚΟΙΝΣΕΠ, στα υπουργεία, στα ερευνητικά προγράμματα των πανεπιστημίων κλπ.) ή να καταφύγει στην Ευρώπη για καριέρα. Κι οι μειοψηφικές προλεταριακές πρακτικές, που μόνο στις πιο βίαιες και αρνητικές εκδηλώσεις τους κατάφερναν να υπερβούν τη λαϊκοδημοκρατική τους πλαισίωση, ακόμα και πριν από το 2012; Όσες δεν φυτοζωούν, έχουν απορροφηθεί πια από τη φιλοεαμική, σταλινική εκδοχή της λαϊκής δημοκρατίας.

Τι είναι αλήθεια αυτό το κωλοσύστημα που δεν αφήνει όλα τα δημοκρατικά λουλούδια ν’ ανθίσουν; Αυτό θα μπορούσε να το εξηγήσει μόνο μια θεωρία που θα εντόπιζε τα σκαμπανεβάσματα της αυτο-αξιοποιούμενης αξίας στο αντιφατικό σταυροδρόμι των ανταγωνιστικών διαδικασιών της αγοράς, των τεχνολογικών αναδιαρθρώσεων της παραγωγής υπεραξίας και των μεταμορφώσεων της κοινωνικής αναπαραγωγής. Μια θεωρία των κρίσεων με άλλα λόγια.

Για τους περισσότερους όμως πρώην κινηματικούς δεν υπάρχει πια χρόνος για νέες θεωρητικές και κινηματικές περιπέτειες. Ό,τι παίχτηκε, παίχτηκε. Τώρα πρέπει να βγει το καθημερινό ψωμί της επιβίωσης, καριέρες πρέπει να χτιστούν, μαγαζιά να οργανωθούν…

Η γλαυξ της Αθηνάς μια ζωή θα πετάει το σούρουπο. Ήδη είναι αργά και δεν έχουμε καμιά ψευδαίσθηση ότι στην ταυτόχρονα πρωτογενή –βασισμένη στις εμπειρίες μας– και αναστοχαστική ιστορία που παρουσιάζουμε στις επόμενες σελίδες θα βρεθούν πολλά ευήκοα ώτα. Η αγωνία της ζωής όμως μας σπρώχνει διαρκώς προς το κέντρο των πραγμάτων· εκεί που δημιουργηθήκαμε. Η προσωπική μας ιστορία είναι άρρηκτα δεμένη με την ιστορία του «αντιμνημονιακού κινήματος». Ας πούμε λοιπόν ότι η δημοσίευση των σκέψεων που ακολουθούν επιβλήθηκε πάνω απ’ όλα από την προσωπική ανάγκη της διαύγασης αυτού που ζήσαμε. Και μεις οι ίδιοι μοιραστήκαμε κάποτε με δύο τρόπους τις ψευδαισθήσεις που εδώ κριτικάρονται: α) υπερεκτιμήσαμε τις αρχικές αυθόρμητες ταξικές πρακτικές, την απόρριψη των πολιτικών κομμάτων, τη διάθεση για αυτοργανωμένη ικανοποίηση των κοινωνικών αναγκών που προηγήθηκαν της ανόδου του Σύριζα και του αντιφασιστικού κινήματος, χωρίς να μπορέσουμε να διακρίνουμε έγκαιρα την αδυναμία απογαλακτισμού τους από τη δημοκρατική ιδεολογία και β) δεν ήμασταν πάντα συνεπείς στην κριτική των Συριζέων, των φιλοσυριζέων συνοδοιπόρων τους και γενικότερα των οπαδών της λαϊκής δημοκρατίας από το φόβο της περιθωριοποίησης και της γκετοποίησης σε μια περίοδο που η πολιτική της απαξίωσης δεν μας άφηνε κανένα περιθώριο αποστασιοποίησης από το πραγματικό κίνημα.

Λίγα λόγια για την ιστορία των κειμένων που ακολουθούν

Μια πρώιμη εκδοχή των κειμένων αυτού του τεύχους, βασισμένη και σε υλικό που είχαμε δημοσιεύσει στα αγγλικά την περίοδο 2011-2015 στα πλαίσια διεθνών συναντήσεων κι εκδηλώσεων, παρουσιάστηκε στην αείμνηστη κατάληψη της Βίλας Ζωγράφου, στις 23 Μαΐου 2015. Μια δεύτερη εκδοχή τους παρουσιάστηκε στην τριήμερη συνάντηση, που συνδιοργάνωσαν τα Παιδιά της Γαλαρίας με την Υπόγεια Σήραγγα, τον Αυτοδιαχειριζόμενο Κοινωνικό Χώρο της Βίλας Ζωγράφου, τη Συνέλευση Αδιαμεσολάβητου Αγώνα Γεωπονικού, το Αυτόνομο Σχήμα ΦΜΣ, το Αυτόνομο Σχήμα ΣΚΣ, εργαζόμενους του ΕΚΠΑ, την πολιτική ομάδα No Lager και τους Αναρχικούς για την Κοινωνική Απελευθέρωση, στον ίδιο χώρο στις 10-12 Ιουλίου 2015. Το τριήμερο στη Βίλα Ζωγράφου αποτελούσε μια πρώτη προσπάθεια ανάγνωσης της αριστερής διαχείρισης της «κρίσης χρέους» και συνάμα (αυτο)κριτικής των αντιμνημονιακών αγώνων στους οποίους είχαμε συμμετάσχει έως τότε, ενόψει και της υπογραφής του νέου, τρίτου κατά σειρά, Μνημονίου –το οποίο υπογράφηκε μία μόλις ημέρα μετά, στις 13/7– εν μέσω «σιωπηλής ανοχής» από το «αντιμνημονιακό κίνημα» της περιόδου 2010-2012. Στην καταληκτική συνέλευση εκείνου του τριήμερου έπεσε η ιδέα για τη δημιουργία μιας δημόσιας συνέλευσης, στα πλαίσια της οποίας θα συζητιόνταν τα μέτρα του νέου Μνημονίου και θα διοργανώνονταν δράσεις ενάντια στην ψήφισή τους. Η συνέλευση αυτή, που πήρε το όνομα Συνέλευση Εργαζομένων και Ανέργων της πλ. Συντάγματος, είχε τις επόμενες ημέρες συχνή δημόσια παρουσία στην πλατεία Συντάγματος, διοργάνωσε δικές της δράσεις (π.χ. παρέμβαση στα ακυρωτικά των σταθμών του μετρό) και συμμετείχε στις ελάχιστες πορείες που καλέστηκαν. Σε αυτά τα πλαίσια η Συνέλευση διοργάνωσε δύο δημόσιες εκδηλώσεις, πάλι στην πλατεία Συντάγματος, με θέμα την νέα επίθεση που οργανωνόταν ενάντια στην εργατική τάξη, προσπαθώντας ταυτόχρονα να αναδείξει το ζήτημα της δικής μας απάντησης σε αυτή. Σε σχέση με αυτό, παρουσιάστηκαν τρόποι με τους οποίους το προλεταριάτο είχε αντιμετωπίσει την μείωση του άμεσου και έμμεσου μισθού στο παρελθόν – έχοντας ως κύρια αναφορά το κίνημα αυτομείωσης των προηγούμενων χρόνων. Μετά την ψήφιση του Μνημονίου και την επανεκλογή του Σύριζα, η Συνέλευση προχώρησε στην έκδοση δύο μπροσούρων, με τίτλο Σκοτώνουν τα άλογα στη δουλειά και όταν γεράσουν τα θάβουν ιδίοις εξόδοις το Δεκέμβρη του 2015 και Θέλουμε μισθό και όχι «δουλίτσα»!, το 2017. Η μεν πρώτη, που αποτέλεσε επανέκδοση παλαιότερης μπροσούρας της Ομάδας Ενάντια στον Εκβιασμό της Μισθωτής Εργασίας συμπληρωμένη με νέο υλικό, κυκλοφόρησε με αφορμή την ριζική αναδιάρθρωση του συστήματος κοινωνικής ασφάλισης, στην οποία προχώρησε τότε η αριστερά του κεφαλαίου και την οποία πραγματοποίησε μέσα στο 2016, η δε δεύτερη με αφορμή την αναδιάρθρωση της εργασιακής νομοθεσίας. Στα κείμενα που ακολουθούν θα βρείτε μια περαιτέρω επεξεργασία αναλύσεων που είχαν διατυπωθεί σε συνεργασία με άλλους συντρόφους στις δύο παραπάνω μπροσούρες, και στο προηγούμενο τεύχος των Παιδιών της Γαλαρίας (# 16-17, 2014).

Η αναδρομή στο κίνημα των προηγούμενων χρόνων θα συνεχιστεί και στο επόμενο τεύχος.

Μάιος 2018

Θα το βρείτε σε διάφορα βιβλιοπωλεία και κινηματικούς χώρους, όπως πάντα.

Προλογικό Σημείωμα σε pdf

Αναρτήθηκε από: Τα παιδιά της γαλαρίας | 2 Ιουνίου 2018

Η παρέμβασή μας στο workshop Mass protest and the future direction of anti-authoritarian internationalism στο FAST FORWARD FESTIVAL των Plan C, Σεπτέμβριος 2017

We would like to thank you for the invitation to your festival, which will give us the opportunity to elaborate a bit on the subject of internationalism and mass protest against capitalist targets.

Our group, TPTG, has been active for years, however, as it is a tiny one, we cannot seriously claim that our own resources and organizing efforts alone could disrupt capital’s infrastructure through mass protest. In the over two decades’ period of our existence, we have mainly tried to be part of the real movement going on in a critical way, that’s why we have been involved in strikes, demonstrations, local assemblies, riots or other kinds of mass protest, in both workplaces and non-workplaces, that is to say, in the production and the circulation sphere.

 It is possible that anti-authoritarian internationalism, as you put it, at least in its current form as counter-summits, may provide a very useful network of comrades around the world through which insights, experience, practical proposals and theoretical analysis can be exchanged. However, it has certain limitations. It has been commonly acknowledged that such events usually exhaust their importance by the end of the respective summits, thus their duration is by their nature pretty short. Therefore, they cannot be the basis for any long term struggle, even though they can cause considerable disruption for a certain and rather predictable period of time, like the shut-down of the port in Hamburg, as it is mentioned in the workshop title.

We also share with you the concern on the more and more scientifically elaborated state management of crowd protests and the advanced repressive techniques the cops have been using. We have dealt with such matters in the recent past when class struggles and mass protest in the streets in Greece had reached an unprecedented level and we were confronted with the need to exchange insights with international comrades on our enemies’ renewed repression techniques. For this purpose, we had started an inquiry on the subject which was triggered off and affected by the Aufhebengate.

…

Η ομιλία μας σε pdf

 

 

Αναρτήθηκε από: Τα παιδιά της γαλαρίας | 9 Οκτωβρίου 2017

ΣΥΖΗΤΗΣΗ-ΕΚΔΗΛΩΣΗ ΜΕ ΤΟΝ GEORGE CAFFENTZIS

 

Η ΚΡΙΣΗ ΤΗΣ ΚΟΙΝΩΝΙΚΗΣ ΑΝΑΠΑΡΑΓΩΓΗΣ ΣΤΙΣ ΗΠΑ ΚΑΙ Η ΠΟΛΙΤΙΚΗ ΤΟΥ ΤΡΑΜΠ

Ποιά είναι η καπιταλιστική στρατηγική πίσω από την προώθηση και την εκλογή Τραμπ;

Ποιές οι συνέχειες και ασυνέχειες με την πολιτική του Ομπάμα;

Προωθεί ο Τράμπ ένα (ρατσιστικό) New Deal με τη «λευκή» εργατική τάξη της Αμερικής;

Και γιατί όλα αυτά μας ενδιαφέρουν εδώ στην Ελλάδα;

Αυτοδιαχειριζόμενο Κυλικείο Νομικής Σχολής

Τετάρτη, 24 Μαίου, 7μμ

Τα Παιδιά της Γαλαρίας * Ομάδα Αυτομόρφωσης για το Κεφάλαιο του Μαρξ

afisa_Trump_hair

Αναρτήθηκε από: Τα παιδιά της γαλαρίας | 21 Μαΐου 2017
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »