No Gods No Masters: Part 4 (1944-69)

No Gods No Masters ‒ A History of Anarchism
https://archive.org/details/NoGodsNoMasters2

No God No Master

a history of anarchism

Eight -hour workday,

direct democracy,

retirement at 60,

labour exchange

trade union, right to strike,

ecology, women's rights,

contraception, free love, abortion,

paid leave, social security

and public education.

Under the Spanish sun,
anarchism had finally shown what it could do

but at the end of World War II

it enters a long night,
populated by monsters.

In the victory's forest

they forget the pacts, the passivities,
the more or less active collaborations

and erase anarchists from history.

Drawn, isolated or forgotten,

unable to resume social struggle,

libertarians then choose to use bodies
and weapons in the cultural struggle.

They create symbols,

restore solidarity

and invest in a new battlefield.

And in the course of the cold war,

where the great powers fight in violence,

they are soon joined by a new youngster

who portrays anarchism in a different way

but helps to give it new visibility.

But these new rebels

the priests of peace and free love

with only flowers as weapons, or stones

clashes with power everywhere

who oppresses them in the fiercest way.

And so it is that both in the East and
the West, from North to South,

anarchism will gradually
take center stage again.

They spread these ideas
behind the scenes of the peace movement,

they inspire new forms of protest

and ending, in a beautiful month of May,

an insurgent movement
that could have

changed the course of the world.

Flowers or paving stones

It's behind barbed wire,

to the rhythm of happy music,

played by the Tigran Orchestra

to lead a fugitive to his execution,

in the secret smell of the crematorium.

And under the brutal gaze of master

who believe they are gods,

that the second half of the 20th century

also starts for anarchists.

At Mauthausen, where
thousands of German, Austrian,

Italian, French and Spanish anarchists

arrested by the Gestapo,

or delivered by the Vichy police,

lost their lifes.

When the time of liberation comes,

although anti-fascists salute
the allied troops in Spanish

the few libertarians who survived the war,

can only see
that the anarchist movement in Europe

is diminished like the skin of sorrow

and that it has lost
almost all of its influence.

It withdraws into itself.

After the failure
of the Spanish Revolution

and after World War II.

Anarchists now only represent
a minority movement.

It does nothing
but repeat their old ideas, their mythology.

Going round in circles

without influencing social movements.

In fact, after the failure
of the Spanish revolution

and World War II,

anarchism is really entering a long night.

- After the second World War,

it becomes very difficult
to be an anarchist,

either in Europe, North America or Asia,

because the world is divided into two camps,

the East and the West.

– So what most anarchists do,

it's that they don't choose
one or the other.

They do not support
either side in the Cold War

and therefore are not relevant
in world politics.

It was a very lonely time
if you are an anarchist during this time.

After the war,

anarchists don't actually take sides,

but recreate organizations everywhere.

The Federation of German Libertarian Socialists

and the Federations of French
and Italian Anarchists

form again the end of the fighting.

In the North, the central organization
of Swedish workers

becomes the strongest libertarian bastion
in Europe.

And in the South, while exiles
and Spaniards open a CNT in Paris,

resistance groups formed
in particular by Kiko Sabate

with mortar attacks resume

the struggle against Franco dictatorship.

Even in the East we see the rebirth
of a libertarian movement

as in Bulgaria, where
the Federation of Anarcho-Communists

organizes its congress
and sets up a new platform.

Latin America is no exception.

It sees anarchists regrouping
for example in Chile and Cuba

within the major
Revolutionary Trade Union Federations.

While Africa temporarily lost
all its structures,

the very young Japanese Anarchist Federation
lead by Ishitawa Sanchiro

and the Federation of Builders
of a Free Society founded in 1945

by the brothers Li Jung-Kyu and Eul-Kyu
nicknamed the Korean Kropotkin,

attest to the persistence of anarchism
in Asia.

But it's outside these organizations and
thanks to one of those little-known courses

that anarchism begins
in this long pre-war night

to get back into the light a little bit.

What's happing to anarchism
is that the idea that

war would be the health of states,

well, this is going to be the
heart of libertarian thought,

through the experiences of World War II.

as it becomes clearer
that the state is directly linked

to fascists, war, chain of command
and collateral damage.

Libertarian pacifism or
non-violent anarchism,

which stems from a long tradition,

knows a real revival with the onset
of the Cold War.

Heir to La Boétie, Chalet,
Sorot and Tolstoy,

these partisans also want to radically
change the world.

But in contrast to of the
apostles of armed insurrection,

they think, that it is possible and
even necessary to do so without violence.

- It's an argument developed
by a range of thinkers

and based on the special attention

which anarchists attribute to
the adequacy between means to the end.

The means you use to bring about
social change

must align with the goal
you want to achieve.

Then violence, revolutionary violence

is often at odds with your goals.

Indeed, if you want to build a society
based on cooperation,

on consensus, direct democracy,

on discussions,

then political violence is not
the means to achieve this goal.

In fact, there is a good chance
that it will corrupt that end.

This theory inspired the revolutionaries
of the time all the more,

now that for the first time,

non-violence has just proven
its effectiveness with Gandhi.

But as the Cold War intensifies,

it's in light of the emergence
of a new threat,

both global and deadly,

that libertarian pacifists can make
themselves known

and spread their thoughts more widely.

This fundamentally changes the mind set,

not only anarchists,

but of all critics of established powers.

Because it appeals to the imagination.

The idea of ​​this eternal threat
of death hovering,

this bomb that is about to explode,

it draws people into a pacifist movement.

The population began to ask passionately
for peace. In a very dramatic way.

Against atomic proliferation,

anti-militaristic and pacifist movements
sprang up all over the world.

We remember, for example,
in the French peace movement

and Gary Davis' 'Citizens of the World'.

There's also the 'Ban the Bomb' movement
that spans from England to Sydney.

And soon there will be gigantic
mobilizations against the Vietnam War.

Some are even directly driven by liberitarians,

like the Vietnam Day Committee,

which will be founded by Gary Rubin,

or the movement for conscientious objectors,

driven in France by Louis de Cointre.

But it is true that almost all anarchists
were pacifists then,

not all pacifists are anarchists.

We find in these mobilizations
liberal humanists,

progressive Christians,
more or less radical socialists,

and a lot of activists with
no fixed political ideas

who just want peace.

Libertarians no less decided to join them

and implementing some sort of
cuckoo strategy

to participate in peace movements.

That's not unusual

Anarchists at the end of the 19th century
did exactly the same thing.

They did not create
large mass organizations.

They didn't even try to convince people
to become anarchists.

What they were trying to do
was to radicalize people,

so they take matters
into their own hands.

They spread their ideas
and people became anarchists.

And the pre-war anarchists
did exactly the same.

What they try to do in the movements

is to convince people that you can't have
the state without the bomb.

If you don't want the bomb,
get rid of the state.

This is the main point they make.

That's the argument
they're having with people.

And what's really interesting
about that point,

it is that the old pacifist currents are
also beginning to denounce this link.

And thanks to that, we've seen the birth
of very strong relationships

between pacifist and anarchist groups.

In the UK and other European countries,

where the movement for peace is
not controlled by Moscow in some cases,

the ties between anarchists and pacifists
become the strongest and the closest.

In the campaign for nuclear disarmament,

behind Herbert Russell,
who is its prominent figure,

we find indeed the finest
of British anarchism

such as Herbert Reed and Thalmanin,
Alex Comfort or Kali Nwerd.

And their influence is quickly felt

down to the name given to the movement,
which says almost everything.

The Direct Action Committee was not
just an anti-war movement.

It also developed a critical social analysis
based on the work of anarchists.

And the term 'direct action'
bears witness to this.

It is a direct translation
of anarchist thinking.

The idea, which may in fact
seem very radical and contradictory,

it's about changing things yourself,
rather than asking someone else to do it.

But in contact with the pacifists,

the anarchists also discover
new fighting techniques

which they decide to adopt as a sort of
non-violent propaganda of the deed,

to show the libertarian message

Pacifist tactics, civil disobedience,
and sit-ins, for example,

point to state violence.

Because by using violence against
non-violent protesters,

the state is in a way condemning itself.

Convinced that it is a mass movement
that can give them the advantage,

on 17 Sept. 1961, a large demonstration
was called for in Trafalgar Square.

Uder pressure, the British power updated
the Justices of the Peace Act,

the nearly 600 year old law,

that allows to preventively
lock up troublemakers.

30 committee members are thrown in jail,

including Alex Comfort
and the 89-year-old Bertrand Russell.

However, on that day,
nearly 15,000 people gather

and make a sit-in
in the main square of London.

There, this demonstration
of non-violent force

only impresses the film cameras

because the government sends the police
who quietly arrest hundreds of protesters.

Anarchists are already wondering.

You see many anarchists in the movement

who consider pacifist tactics,

either as very naive
or as fundamentally ineffective,

when we think of
the nature of class war,

or even worse, as an excuse to do nothing.

Many revolutionaries,

in the UK or elsewhere,

abandon pacifist tactics.

And when anarchists accept to participate

to in peace demonstrations

it will often be to increase
the conflict there.

But it wasn't until the 1960s that,
in the land of tulips,

new White Knights of the revolution

with a new form of non-violent struggle,

literally lit the fire in the bin.

In the Sixties, in the West

the world has changed a lot.

New estates have covered the ruins,

the baby boom has
rejuvenated the population,

full employment fills the wallet

and the American dream began
to colonize the imagination.

The emergence of a middle class

has even caused the old social divide
to be forgotten.

We have entered the society of
leisure and consumption,

it is the reign of the supermarkets,

of cars and television.

This is the golden age of tobacco,
rock'n'roll and soda.

Its also the triumph of the welfare state

which requires revolutionaries
to deepen their critique.

After the second World War,

you have a much more current state

that promises universal education,

that provides social assistance
to everyone,

which increasingly regulates
workers' rights.

The state therefore seems more benign

than 100 or 150 years ago.

Anarchists therefore to some extent are

with the back to the wall,
as life seems to have improved

for a lot of people.

But what anarchists try to show,

it is that even if life looks good,
this isn't a good life.

The critical argument of anarchists

is that capitalism

and the mass culture of modern society

you know, consumerism,

advertisement,

the rise of Coca Cola,

all this embodies a form of banality

and spreads a kind of banal
and sterile culture.

This absurd feeling is especially
felt by the youth

who gradually became aware
of their numbers,

their power and the role

that they could play
in a revolutionary process.

Like the USA

with the Free Speech Movement,

they begin to make their voices
heard everywhere.

Begin 1965,

this phenomenon will also manifest itself
in the Netherlands,

even if anarchism has not yet
experienced its resurgence

and society seems locked up from within.

In the early 1960s,

The Netherlands was a tight country.

Society was closed in on itself

and young people had nothing to say.

I think, In the 60s,

the prevailing authoritarianism

scared young people so much

that they had no choice but to revolt.

He is a young philosophy student

who decides to herald the hour
of the uprising here.

Roel van Duijn was active in
Ban the Bomb Netherlands

and also reached the limits
of pacifist struggle tactics.

But although he holds
an important position

in the anarchist monthly magazine
'De Vrije',

he feels a bit cramped in traditional
libertarian organizations.

The anarchism of the 1960s was, in fact,
the anarchism of the 1920s.

It was a group of old men

And he, he was the only boy

and he struggled to push
these new ideas forward.

This caused a lot of fights.

So he left the anarchist movement
very disappointed

to create his own movement
and his own magazine.

To begin his movement,

Roel van Duijn decides with some comrades

among them editor Rob Stolk
to create a journal.

He calls it 'Provo'.

A name all the better chosen

by addressing a segment
of the youth directly

which he nicknamed 'Provotaria'

instead of as the prolitariat
which, according to him,

has become unable to change the world.

It has the strength
to denounce a whole programme.

The word itself was taken from
a thesis on criminology.

He defined a form of delinquency

and the Provos decided
to get creative with it,

to talk about how to spread resistance.

And it was through provocation.

That's the idea.

So if you could transgress
or break the rules,

or participate in an activity

which would shock or irritate,
even infuriate power

and get a reaction from it

then you could draw people

into a resistance movement.

Roel van Duijn is indeed
the first to theorize

the famous cycle of
provocation-repression-mobilization.

In a booklet he precisely
dissects the mechanics

and openly shows his goals.

The provocation,
in the present circumstances,

has become our only weapon.

Through provocation
we can expose authority.

Uniform, boots, caps, sables, clubs,
watercanons, dogs, tear gas.

It must be forced to use all these
means of repression against us.

Then it will be forced
to show its true colors.

It will make itself
more and more unpopular

and make the people ready for anarchism.

Since their texts are only printed
in a few hundred copies,

to put all odds on their side,

the Provos bring out the old scares:

They print a recipe to make a bomb.

And this immediately
creates tension in the city.

There are arrests

this draws the press,

and it attracts young people
looking for action.

And so it galvanizes

because it does exactly
what it is meant to do,

that is, to provoke.

For a first attempt,
it is indeed a master piece.

In a few months the group grew from
about 20 members to several hundred.

But if they manage to make great gains,

it's also because provos
don't just provoke.

These supporters of direct action
and propaganda by the deed

propose and implement their ideas.

For example to fight
the dominance of cars

they come up with the 'White Bicycle' plan
and put out bicycles for free

and freely accessible in the streets of Amsterdam.

They make the happenings against
old and new colonialism

and come up with credible alternatives
to the drift of the consumer society.

Witch limited resources,
but always without violence,

the Provos try to change the world,
by painting them white

the color that
- in the 60s in the Netherlands -

is the new black of the anarchists.

But the mayor of Amsterdam, Gijs van Hall,

and Jan Van der Maden, the police chief,
perceive all this commotion

not as provocation, but as real threats.

They stop the happenings and
confiscate the bicycles.

They are all the more concerned
because in March 1966,

Amsterdam must host an event
of the utmost importance.

But this time,
the provocateurs may feel provoked

and decide to take action.

At some point, we learnt from
the newspapers that princess Beatrix

got engaged to a German,

a German who had been
a member of the Hitler Youth

and who had taken part in the war
as a soldier in the German army.

He was therefore considered
by the left as a real Nazi

and in the context of the Holocaust
and how it happened

especially in the Netherlands and
in Amsterdam it was deeply problematic.

To demonstrate their opposition to this
marriage that will take place on 10 March

and will be broadcast on TV, the Provos
want to invite themselves to the wedding

and as Roel van Duijn had also theorized
that he was only an image

prominently featured in the wedding photo.

To increase the pressure
prior to the wedding,

he likes to spread the strongest rumours.

And this time again not with violence,
but with crazy proposals.

For example, they said that they were going
to put LSD in Amsterdam's drinking water

or on sugar cubes
to give to the police horses.

LSD was the main drug at the time
and was immediately banned.

All this caused a kind of panic.

So there was a massive police presence
on the wedding day.

On the morning of 10 March 1966,
this very strong police presence

must have deterred the Provos from acting.

At first, everything seems
to be going well.

the royal carriage quietly
cuts through the crowd

and under the watchful eye of cameras
from all over the world

It drives from the Dam to the Westerkerk.

Despite the gray of the sky
and the black-and-white,

for the millions of viewers
who watched the ceremony,

The Netherlands have definitely not
ursurped its reputation

as a country where nothing ever happens.

The bride is very beautiful,
the lavish protocol is luxurious.

But suddenly there is disorder, confusion.

Could terrorism have struck again
at the passage of the crowned head,

as it did in the days of
propaganda by the deed?

Bombs went off for the first time
in decades.

Bombs. Was it a smoke bomb?
Just smoke.

The Provos had been preparing
for some time.

For entire nights in a small cladestine
flat, they had meticulously mixed

three parts of potassium nitrate
with the two parts of icing sugar.

They made more than 200 smoke bombs

that only need a match or
a cigarette stub to go up in smoke.

A harmless arsenal, of course,
but with a devastating effect.

The strategy was simply to disrupt order.
We'll let it go up in smoke.

We smoke everything. It's smoke.

And we don't see them anymore.
So we eliminate them.

This is, of course, a theatrical gesture.

It punctured all this pomp and splendour.

And the authorities felt ridiculed,
which angered them.

And that explains why the subsequent
police repression was so severe.

Before the newspaper De Telegraaf demands
nothing less than the definite solution

of the Provo problem,

the chief of police already demands
the heads of the ringleaders.

The Marcheussee is all over town
with megaphones.

All demonstrations are prohibited.

The smallest disturbances
are violently dispersed.

The hunt for Provo is on
in the streets of Amsterdam.

Repression strikes.

But one thing was changing.

The population began
to sympathize with the Provos.

We saw in the media that more and more
people defended their actions

and condemned the attitude
of the authorities.

Public opinion turned against the police
and the state in favour of the Provos.

By the middle of 1966, despite or rather
thanks to the repression,

the Provos were aware of their fame.

Their names resonate with their travel plans
and they start new groups.

In the Netherlands, of course, groups are
formed in Rotterdam, Den Haag, Maastricht,

but also throughout Europe.

In Belgium, Switzerland, West Germany,
Italy, the United Kingdom,

in Paris, where a demonstration takes place
under the cry of anarchy and freedom .

And the White Peril extends to the USA,
where Berkeley's Constitution Park

is renamed Provo Park in tribute
to the Amsterdam revolutionaries.

The eyes of the whole world are
on the Netherlands

and some are already imagining that

the young, playful and borderline revolt
of the Provos could turn into a revolution.

A social movement that started then
and that would lead the Netherland

to the brink of revolt
seemed to agree with them.

Trade unions call for a major mobilization
of the workers on 13 June.

Roel van Duijn and his comrades call on
the provotaria to join the demonstration.

The accidental death of a protester,
allegedly a victim of police brutality,

suddenly brings the battle together.

The demonstration turns into a riot.

The Provos and the workers, together with
the student masses and the black bombers,

turn the inner city into battlefields.

They find the cobblestones,
they turn over the cars,

Despite support of pimps,
stones are thrown at the police

The newspaper Telegraaf is set on fire.

Amsterdam is on fire.

Faced with the scale of the unrest, parliament
convenes for an extraordinary session.

The authorities were under pressure.

Not by the Provos, but by public opinion.

As a result, the police commissioner was fired
and the mayor of Amsterdam had to resign.

It could have been
a victory for the Provos

but in their non-violent logic,
instead of taking advantage of it,

they prefer to distance itself from the
movement by creating a mass hysteria

that they had nothing to do with.

Unable to grasp this revolutionary momentum,

the end of their movement is nothing
more than a long torment.

Infiltrated, their plans are thwarted,

and as the new authorities no longer know
how to respond to their provocation,

their tactics come to nothing.

Those who live from the dangerous spectacle
suffer themselves through the spectacle,

Those who would have only wanted to be images
know the fate of images.

They become post cards.

All that international attention,
which came not only from the press,

but also from young people from all over.

We even offered Provo tours.

All this was beyond the original
intention of these guys.

They weren't organizing.
They were just a group of rebels.

In a final move, Roel van Duijn and
his comrades decide to disband the movement.

On 15 May 1967, they gathered
at Speakers' Corner in Vondelpark

and announced the end
of the Provo movement.

Rob Stolk and Roel van Duijn,
you came here to burry Provo. Why?

I'm also going to get my name changed
because I'm against leaders

and I have became too known.
I'm liquidating myself.

And that was that.

After two years in which they laid
the Netherland to the bottom,

the Provos left each to their side.

Roel van Duijn would later confesss about
the failure of the Provos:

"Our only fault is that we aimed too short."

The gesture of the Provosts of Amsterdam
is relatively forgotten today,

but will have a decisive influence
in the years to come.

You were inspired by their ideas,
their strategies,

but you were also aware
of the limits of their movement.

Other libertarians will
take up their torch

and spring 1968
will awaken all revolutionary hopes.

The lovely month of May

Good night.

Sweet dreams...

On the eve of 1968,

the anarchist movement in France
still had not come out of the night.

It's necessary to see that groups
inevitable stop - here as everywhere.

The libertarian organizations stopped
during these years from syndicating,

merging, disappearing and then returning.

To bring all these groups together,

to coordinate their activities and
to cut ties with other revolutionary cells,

We can't think of anything better
than to create a lot of committees.

One gets lots.

Faced with this disorganized organizations

it becomes essential
to restore a semblance of unity

A group of young libertarians from Paris
decides to invent a symbol.

The circeled A dates from April 1964.

It is presented to the anarchist movement,

in an issue of the
young libertarians' bulletin.

With an explanation

why it would be good if the anarchists,
when they write on walls,

when they make posters,
systematically use this symbol.

Two main motivations have guided us.

Firstly, to facilitate and make
more effective the practical activities

of registration and postings.

Second, to ensure a wider presence of the
anarchist movement in the eyes of the people.

The logo chosen seemed to us
to best meet the criteria.

By constantly associating
with the word anarchist,

it will end up
with a familiar mental automatism,

evoking the idea of ​​anarchism
in people's minds.

After all, they are marketing techniques.
It's that stupid.

All anarchist groups,
despite their very strong differences,

- and sometimes opposition,
that existed between them -

they would all use the same logo.

It would have an amplifying effect on the
presence of anarchists on the walls of Paris,

or in Parisian political life.

The facts are not direct.

And while in the following years,

libertarians everywhere are maneuvering
in the uprisings led by the youth.

Like in Italy,

where students clashed with the police
during the great battle of Valle Guilia,

in West Germany, where riots break out
in response to the attempted assassination

of student movement figure Rudi Dutschke.

In the USA,

where the land protest movement opposes
the Vietnam War and demands equal rights,

but also in the Eastern Bloc, with
demonstrations against censorship in Poland,

or the Prague Spring in Czechoslovakia,

in France, we still don't see
anything coming.

A major evening newspaper even claims
that France is bored.

And yet everything begins in the suburbs
of Paris, at the University of Nanterre,

where there are many convinced
and experienced anarchist militants.

Yes, I'm part of an anarchist group.

And we publish these flyers,
which we spread in our circles

Now this is the best way to find out
what it is, you read it there,

and then you can form your opinion.

That's all I can tell you.
- Did you live in the house?

Yes, I live in the residence.

Why? You're talking to
some cops, aren't you?

These activists know
their libertarian history.

Some even went to the Netherlands
to meet the Provo.

They criticize the education system,

which they believe only reproduces
the structures of domination.

But they don't just want to bring
the revolution to the university,

they want to change life in general.

Among them, one Daniel Cohn-Bendit,

who was then said to be a libertarian,
stood out very early on.

There is no doubt about it.

He is an anarchist soldier,
member of the Anarchist Federation,

member of the anarchist students liason,
member of Black and Red,

member of all these movements.

But he's not the only one.
Other figures appear on the sides.

Like Olivier Castro, who then defined
himself as an independent anarchist,

Jean-Pierre Dutteuil, who also belonged
to the liaison of anarchist students,

or the discreet René Riesal,
always with his dark glasses,

who would find the group 'Les Enragés'.

On 20 March 1968,
he and a hundred other students

decided to occupy a floor of the
management tower of the faculty of Nanterre.

They meet in council, debate,
sing songs and write on the walls

as the very first A in a circle.

Kicked out of Nanterre, the students head
to the Sorbonne in the heart of the capital.

The police intervene,
but '68 has just begun.

Because unlike the Provo,
the Parisian libertarians choose to confront.

Around Olivier Castro, seen here
with his back, they organize the reaction.

Helms on, masked face, they pick up
enough to go on the offensive.

The stones of the streets of Paris
are pulled up

and for several days and nights,
intoxicated by the smell of gas,

young revolutionaries write an old chanson
with gestures in the air,

or improvise new dance steps.

There's an extraordinary excitement
that just needs riots

and those who never rioted
can't know what it is.

The taste, the taste of the barricade.

Contrary to what the legend says,
the repression is very brutal.

Nothing can stop it. The Latin quarter
falls into the hands of the insurgents.

Finally reopened,
the Sorbonne is proclaimed as free.

The black flag flies over the courtyard.

Rooms are renamed after the heroes of
libertarian history, such as the Amphi Bono.

A permanent general assembly is formed.

An occupancy committee is elected
and can be revoked at any time.

They write on the walls, reinvent culture,
they print leaflets and newspapers.

They open a free cafeteria for everyone,

they create a crèche
under their own management.

Thanks to the formidable
Katangais fighters,

they also organize self-defense courses.

On all floors they discuss the world,
life, love and revolution for over a month.

We need to change the structures of society
if we want to change the university

How to change this society?
- Making revolution

Of course, not all students are anarchists.

But the libertarians are there,

along with the militants
of the other revolutionary tendencies.

Maoists, Trotskyists, Guevarians,

also and especially the masses students
without a political group

whose ideas are not yet well established,

but who also want to participate
in the revolutionary movement.

The great quality of the anarchists
on 2 May 68,

was to admit a large number of people
who were seen as 'unorganized'.

People who came out of nowhere,

who suddenly showed up in May 68
to take their place.

And not to send them back to school,
to primary school,

so that they had to go through
all the steps.

And it was a great libertarian force,
of emancipation

that enabled everyone to take their place.

While they fought hard against the
Stalinist practices of certain groups,

even if they were not Stalinists,
even if they were anti-Stalinist,

they often had unsavory practices.

The movement is spreading.

Like here, at the University of Strasbourg,

Soon all the French universities
are joining. But not only.

It's a moment when we've often tended
to overestimate the student component,

the cultural component of the protest.

But what is also very interesting is
the worker component of 1968.

And the climate of general insubordination
of workers that came to light in May 68.

This is indeed the specificity
of the French '68,

because the ruthless repression
of the student movement

had provoked
a mobilization of the workers.

The unions organized a day of general strike.

On 13 May, a huge demonstration took place
in black flag in the front.

But the next day,
stopping the machines

the workers spontaneously decided
to continue the movement.

This is the first wild
general strike in history.

All sectors are affected,
not only large public groups,

but also private companies,
large or small.

The power stations have been shut down,
the chimneys have stopped smoking.

In the mines, nobody wants to go down
to work, the docks are abandoned.

Even the most unexpected sectors
are participating in the strike.

The banks are closed,

the department stores
are occupied by their staff.

Garbage collection is discontinued.

Banners adorn the entrances
of luxury hotels.

The bargemen occupy the Seine.

Tax is no longer collected.

The mowers don't come in anymore.

The zoos are on vacation
and the tolls are free.

Radio and television demand
an end to censorship.

And the public news replace
jingles with small circled A's.

Even the footballers ask for the end of the
alienation and occupy their federation.

During the great strikes of 1936
there were 2 million strikers.

In May 1968 there
were 6 million at the start,

and after a few days
more than 10 million in all of France.

Not only in all major cities in France,
but also in the countryside.

So that it should not be forgotten.

I found archive files of
tractors crushing the sub-prefectures.

We've never seen that.

It was great, really great.

We would never have thought that
a week earlier.

And that gives all their justification
to the anarchist ideas.

People can become aware.
Anarchism is alive.

People are capable if they are aware
of living it immediately.

Spontaneously, people turn into anarchists
or libertarians, as if they always had been so.

Of course these revolutionary premises
left out some aspects of emancipation.

The patriarchy is only partially denounced,

what is not yet called minorities
remains invisible

and the ecological question is not asked.

But everywhere there is talk of
self-government and direct democracy.

And by the end of May,
we are beginning to imagine

the disappearance of the boundaries
of work and money.

There were workers going
about their IT business,

as there were many other busy workplaces.

And they took a sun bath
on the terrace of the company.

The management came to ask them.
What do you want?

What are you asking for?

We don't want to work anymore,
we don't want this society anymore.

Okay, we understand.

But in terms of hours, salary,
what do you want?

It was a dialogue of the deaf.

It is like a screed of lead
that exploded and the joys of life,

the exuberances have regained their rights.

And when exuberance regains its rights,
as Raoul Vaneigem so beautifully said,

people regain the taste for life,
and the taste for daring.

But this boldness is not to everyone's taste.

In an emergency, the head of state
convenes an extraordinary council.

The given set point is repeated from
the top of the state to the bottom.

Summary of the opinion
of the President of the Republic,

it is reform yes, blackmail no.

It was in Lyon, where committed,
structured and organized anarchists

were at the forefront of the movement,
that the reaction began.

There is a strong anarchist presence
in Lyon, that's true.

First, there is an anarchist tradition
in Lyon, which is old.

That's one thing.

And so people are part of this
anarchist tradition, the new anarchists.

The Lyon anarchists are all
'New Look' anarchists,

who have read the International Situationist
and find it absolutely formidable.

Gathered within the L'Hydre de Lerne, a
dissident group of the Anarchist Federation,

these New Look libertarians are also
numerous in the 20 March movement in Lyon.

They occupied their faculty and tried
to link up with the workers

of the great bastions of Berliet
and the Rhodiaceta.

But unlike Paris, the movement has
remained fairly wise from the start.

However, on 24 May, they march
under the leadership of the anarchists

against an impressive police force.

There is only one barricade night in Lyon,

but it is the night of the barricades
that has somehow

become a symbol
of May 68 for all of France.

Because during this night of the barricades,
a police commissioner appears to have died.

Running back from the scene of horror

on the Presqu'île where they defeated
the riot police

the demonstrators had decided to march
towards the police headquarters

located on the other side of the Rhône.

But at the entrance of the Lafayette bridge,
a barrier awaits them.

To force the passage,
in the confusion, revolutionairies

commandeer a construction truck
and launch it at the forces.

At five o'clock it is launched
with a stone on the accelerator.

In first gear, it moves very slowly,
very slowly, very slowly

and the police has plenty time
to step aside to let the truck pass.

The police don't have to step aside

when the truck
crashes quite close to the bridge.

But just at this moment Commissioner Lacroix,
a police officer, falls ill.

He died because he was present
on the night of the barricades.

He was terrified, he had a heart attack
when this truck arrived.

But he wasn't hit by that truck.

I found in the archive that he was taken by
ambulance to the Grange-Blanche hospital,

and he was treated in this hospital.

He was alive.
He talked to the doctors and nurses.

And during the treatment,
an hour or two later,

he died during the treatment.

That's it. He didn't die
being run over by the truck.

And yet, the next morning,
at the first news of the day,

the Prefect of Police of Lyon
speaks live on television

and gives another version of the event.

And so the Commissaire Rene Lacroix,
leaving behind three children,

was crushed between the parapet
of the bridge and this truck.

The aim was to criminalize everything 68

and indeed, because a police officer died,

the reaction to this event turned it
into a rallying cry for revenge.

Shock strategy and production of consent.

During the officer's state funeral,

the police version is repeated
over and over.

"Officer Lacroix who tried to stop it,

was crushed between the truck
and the railing of the bridge."

Along with others, this often-overlooked
event in May's history

changed public opinion in just a few days
and reversed the situation.

The powers regains the advantage.

Demonstrations are banned.
The occupations are evicted.

And certain figures of the movement
are imprisoned

or, like Daniel Cohn-Bendit, expelled.

May 68 is over.

But even as
the libertarian revolution fails,

the workers still get better working and
living conditions thanks to the struggle.

High schools and universities are
becoming more democratic

and media censorship
is temporarily easing.

And in the years that follow, the balance
of power that emanates from the movement

allows it to reclaim some of its rights
that the anarchists have been righting for decades.

like the one on abortion,

which confirms the old libertarian saying

that no revolutionary effort is ever new.

The war in Spain, May 68
are indeed failures.

But people remember it as a time

when it was possible
to overthrow the regime.

And this impression continues.

The questioning of hierarchies
was very profound.

And to this day nothing
has been able to pass them.

Stopped in France, the insurgent movement
continues in the world.

From the North to the South,
from one continent to another

whatever systems and regimes

follow the fever and matter

in all major capitals,

with instructions, to do as in France.

In Brussels, London, Zurich, Stockholm,
Montevideo, Tokyo,

students are occupying their universities,

creating communes and
calling for workers to join them.

Even in the most unexpected countries,
young people are revolting.

Under the silent boot it is in Spain,

behind the wall as in Yugoslavia or Germany
and in the countries of the South.

In Instanbul and Ankarra,
they take to the streets again.

In Dakar and Beirut

intellectual and manual workers
also work together.

And in Pakistan, the general strike
brings down the government.

But while libertarians may have
enjoyed this new glory,

when they organized a new international
convention in September 1968,

in Carrara, Italy, their old demons
take over again.

The generation opose each other
and the currents are torn apart.

And so, at a the time when anarchist
organizations could have played a role

in this international revolutionary movement
they let the train of history pass.

The reaction that works all over you,
choked in the ballot boxes,

in the notes, in the blood,
the dreams of youth change.

In Chicago, students' anti-war march
is crushed.

In Japan, the revolutionary students
of Todai University are purged

And on 2 October 1968, on Mexico's
Plaza of the Three Cultures,

the government fired at the students
who had gathered peacefully.

More than 300 are dead.

This event, that will be remembered
as the Tlatelolco massacre

and that put an end to the dream
of a possible peaceful change,

it reminds many revolutionaries
of Bakunin's words.

Revolutions are not a child's play,
not an academic debate,

not a literary contest
that just spills ink.

Revolution is war.

And who says that war means destruction
of people and things?

It is undoubtedly a pity for humanity
that it has not yet invented

a more peaceful means of progress.

But until now, every new step in history

has been truly accomplished
only after receiving the blood baptism.

Collectively subtitled by anarchists
on amara.org