![](\"https://cdn.crimethinc.com/assets/articles/2025/02/23/6.jpg\")
Click on the image to download the flier.
\nIn the following narrative, a bus driver describes how the cuts that Elon Musk is carrying out in the federal government are affecting ordinary public transit workers.
\n\nThere is a poetic opposition between the figure of the anonymous bus driver and Elon Musk, the billionaire car mogul. The bus driver and the automobile profiteer represent different modes of transportation—public and private—that imply different models for society. On the one hand, a vision of collectivity emerging from common resources and public service; on the other, an unbridled profit motive justifying privatization, isolation, and immiseration. Everyone riding together—or the lone plutocrat speeding away from a betrayed community. Why else market the “Cybertruck” as bulletproof?
\n\nElon Musk made much of his fortune from taxpayer-funded subsidies; now he is trying to delete all of the functions of the government except the ones that benefit him personally. The irony of a man who made his fortune selling cars implying that impoverished bus drivers are parasites on the public should not be lost on anyone. As much as Elon Musk pretends to be an enemy of big government, billionaires like him need the state more than anyone else does. It is easy enough to imagine public transit without the state—all it would take would be to abolish the mechanisms (such as property rights) that impose artificial scarcity, so that those who enjoy doing things for others’ benefit could do so without fear of going hungry. But it is not possible to imagine Elon Musk without a government forcefully extracting hundreds of billions of dollars of taxes with which to protect him from those he exploits and oppresses.
\n\nPeople around the country have begun expressing their displeasure against Elon Musk by demonstrating at Tesla dealerships. Another round of demonstrations is scheduled for March 1, this Saturday. Without further ado, the bus driver’s story.
\n\n Click on the image to download the flier.
\n“Did you see that Facebook post about the budget cuts?” my co-worker asks. “What the fuck, no,” I reply. She hands me her phone. I see a headline announcing that, due to the push to slash basic services coming from Elon Musk and Donald Trump, 20% of our funding for local public transportation is now threatened. Lawyers are fighting it out in the courts, but if these cuts go through, it will mean less service, possible layoffs, and lots of people not having access to a system that is one of the few lifelines for poor people in our area. People depend on these buses to get to their jobs, to medical appointments, to programs for special needs adults, to court dates.
\n\nI sit back down, staring out the window at the cold, grey parking lot. I am waiting for a member of the morning shift to come in with a bus so I can take it out. A few buses dot the bus yard. They’re sitting idle because the parts on order haven’t come in for months—even years, in some cases—and because the city refuses to hire enough mechanics to keep up with daily maintenance. This means that drivers on night shift, like me, sometimes have to wait hours for a bus to arrive. Our transit agency, which contracts out to a huge multi-national corporation, is already dramatically underfunded. The new cuts will only compound our existing problems.
\n\n“Fucking Musk, man,” I say with a sigh. Another co-worker on the night shift agrees with me. He’s in his mid-70s, but he’s still working full time because he recently burned through all his savings burying his parents. I launch into a long rant about how both Musk and Trump hate labor unions and workers and want to replace us all with artificial intelligence. A third co-worker, presumably a Trump supporter, grumbles about how “they” just want to blame the cuts threatening our jobs on the “administration.”
\n\nWho else would you blame it on?
\n\n![](\"https://cdn.crimethinc.com/assets/articles/2025/02/23/2.jpg\")
\nIt’s pitch-dark when I enter the trailer park, passing a metal gate, I drive slowly through the ever-growing rows of manufactured homes. Some of them have signs reading “For sale.”
\n\n“Lots of people moving out?” I ask my only passenger.
\n\n“Yeah, no one can afford to live here anymore,” she replies. As I turn the corner, she launches into a long tirade about the corporation who owns the trailer park and how they keep raising the cost of “space rent,” the monthly fee that mobile home owners pay to trailer park owners. “Every year the rent here goes up. New people move in from out of town and they can pay more, and that’s pushing us out,” she says, as I unhook her walker inside the cold, dark bus cab. “I don’t know why the landlords are so greedy. Do they just want everything?” I lower her and her walker down onto the pavement outside her trailer.
\n\nAs the electronic ramp whirls its gears, I turn to my left. In her front window, there is a strange collage of images of Donald Trump. It is faded and worn from the sun. I shake my head and chuckle, resisting the temptation to point out the obvious. How can you complain about a corporate landlord ruining your life, but place all of your hopes in another landlord who is trying to become a dictator?
\n\nPerhaps she senses my disdain. “Trump is gonna fix it, you’ll see. Prices are going to go down once he starts drilling.”
\n\nMy eyes narrow. “Biden was drilling more oil than any president before him,” I reply.
\n\n“He needs to get his head drilled,” she retorts, making me laugh. Then she launches into another rant about DEI and how it ruined the schools she apparently taught at before she retired. As she hobbles inside, I cast one more glance over my shoulder. Trump’s smiling face leers back at me, ominous. The machine moans as the wheelchair lift cycles back into place.
\n\n![](\"https://cdn.crimethinc.com/assets/articles/2025/02/23/1.jpg\")
\nI meet all sorts of people like this at my job. One guy smells like piss so bad while I strap in his wheelchair that I have to turn my head so I don’t gag. The car in front of the house where I pick him up has a bumper sticker on it reading, “I Don’t Trust the Liberal Media.” I wonder if the conservative media is telling him his healthcare is about to be nuked from orbit.
\n\nAnother guy, as I load and unload his wheelchair, takes out his Trump hat, puts it on, and asks me what I think of it. I tell him Trump and Musk want to use the military to shoot protesters, destroy unions, and fire workers like me, so why would I give a fuck about them. He looks away, says, “Alright then,” and jets off on his electronic scooter. I wonder if he is looking forward to ICE deporting half of his neighbors.
\n\nOn election day, I lost it and got into a heated back and forth with a pro-Trump guy. He rested his case by proclaiming that we need to make it easier on rich people so that the wealth will trickle down to the rest of us. I want to grab these people and shake them.
\n\nTrump represents the triumph of the nihilism of our age. The foreclosure of the idea that the working-class can take and shape its own destiny. Instead, apparently, we should throw ourselves at the mercy of a reality TV star who shits in a gold toilet, eats breakfast with billionaire pedophiles, and has dinner with neo-Nazis between rounds of golf. In the absence of the kind of social movements that could connect people and enable them to grow and change, Trump has built a mass parasocial spectacle that makes these isolated people feel like they are part of something greater than themselves even as all of our lives become smaller and smaller, more and more impoverished and alienated.
\n\nThere’s an old saying that society get the villains it deserves. Perhaps our age is getting the fascists it deserves, too.
\n\n![](\"https://cdn.crimethinc.com/assets/articles/2025/02/23/3.jpg\")
\nI shuffle into the union hall, past the placards reading “ON STRIKE” and faded signs several decades old. Almost fifteen years ago, during Occupy, I attended a meeting in this same room. I wonder what’s changed since then. I find a seat and one of our union shop stewards slides a packet across the table to me. I open it up and start paging through it, looking at the spreadsheets and graphs.
\n\nWe start to discuss the ins and outs of the proposed contract that our elected union representatives and corporate lawyers have been going over during recent meetings. One of the much-hated top corporate bosses was recently fired for corruption, much to the delight of the entire workforce. As one of my co-workers said, “Really tells you a lot about a place when motherfuckers are walking around singing, ‘Ding-dong, the witch is dead!’ and morale has never been higher!”
\n\nWe go through the contract. Despite a few small improvements, things are mostly the same. “What about the pay?” I ask, fingers crossed. The shop steward cocks her head to the side and turns a page, pointing with her pen to a graph showing a dollar increase. She explains that the contract will be for five years, during which time we’ll only be getting a few cents more each year. “This is literally what I was making ten years ago,” I sigh, “and this contract will be valid for five years?”
\n\nI already can’t save money. Imagine what things will be like in five years.
\n\nShe shrugs. “We’re encouraging you to vote “Yes,”’ she says, and hands me a piece of paper on which to mark an “X” signifying yes or no.
\n\nIf enough workers vote the contract through, the company will ratify it and it will govern my life for the next five years—presuming that I don’t get downsized. Any strike or protest activity will be illegal, as per our “No Strike” agreement. If enough people vote no, it goes back to the union bargaining team, and they will continue to bargain for more changes in closed door meetings.
\n\nI head into another room, mark an X by “NO,” and drop the piece of paper into a wooden box. I wave to a few co-workers on my way out. As I leave, I pass a portrait of Sean O’Brien, the president of the Teamsters union. You smug bastard, I say to myself. I remember his glasses and bald head on stage of the Republican National Convention last year, when he called Donald Trump a “Tough son of a bitch.” What a dipshit.
\n\nI used to have a poster in my room many years ago, proclaiming, “The past doesn’t pass.” Next to the slogan was a photo of striking Teamster bus drivers—bus drivers, just like me—beating police officers with baseball bats during the general strike of 1934 in Minneapolis. That was one of the decisive labor battles that forced the ruling class to accept the New Deal in order to cool down the class war that was brewing on the streets.
\n\nThe past doesn’t pass, but the future can leave you behind.
\n\n![](\"https://cdn.crimethinc.com/assets/articles/2025/02/23/4.jpg\")
\nAt home, I look over a letter announcing that people in my neighborhood shouldn’t drink the tap water because the levels of uranium in the river are too high. Sometimes I wonder what I would say to my children about this moment in history—if I could afford to have children. Probably the same things my parents say to me now: they’re sorry we are inheriting this world. Sorry they didn’t fix it. Sorry they didn’t build strong enough movements to turn the tide against these monsters.
\n\nAt work, as I drive, I begin to notice that there are fewer Trump flags and signs out. Resentment is rising. A joke by a cashier here about being replaced by AI, a comment there about Trump cutting programs. I walk into the break room and someone is shaking their head angrily while watching a video of Musk on their phone. They mutter something about tariffs and rising prices.
\n\nThe tension in the air is palpable. It is similar to how things felt at the start of the economic crisis in 2008, when many of the homes in my neighborhood were foreclosed on and many people lost their jobs. It also reminds me of the start of the pandemic—how at first, I thought it wouldn’t be so bad, only to watch in horror as our family members and friends succumbed to the virus.
\n\nIn 2008, many people thought that crowds would flood the streets immediately when the administration bailed out the banks while leaving the rest of us high and dry. That didn’t happen. It took years for resistance to grow. In Chicago, workers occupied their factory when they were terminated without pay. In Wisconsin, workers occupied the capitol building against government attacks on collective bargaining. In California, students occupied universities to protest budget cuts. The Occupy movement began in the fall of 2011 and rapidly built to massive occupations of city squares across the US, coordinated port shut downs, and a general strike in Oakland, California. With Joe Biden as vice president, the federal government helped to coordinate violent raids targeting the movement in order to break it apart.
\n\nIn 2020, on the other hand, things didn’t fester—they exploded like a bomb. Millions of people across the country mobilized in response to the pandemic, providing mutual aid in the face of government inaction and right-wing disinformation, and then hit the streets in the George Floyd uprising.
\n\nWho knows how things will evolve this time. It will probably be different from both of those scenarios, but it could be similar in some ways. What is clear is that things are not as people expected them to be. Many people on the left thought—or at least hoped—that Trump would govern the way he did the first time, constrained by mass protest, the courts, and his own party. Many who voted for him honestly did not expect him to follow through on many of the policies he explicitly promised to carry out. Those who were not paying attention are surprised that suddenly, jobs are disappearing and services are being cut while prices only continue to rise.
\n\nThe material conditions are forcing people to reckon with the fact that the state is attempting to reshape our lives for the sake of an authoritarian project. As we speak, thousands of people are flooding town halls across the United States, screaming at their so-called representatives about the plan to gut programs like Medicaid—only to hear the bureaucrats repeat a slew of MAGA talking points. Anger is brewing. Hopefully the MAGA strategy of “flooding the zone” with shit will produce diminishing returns as people turn towards their neighbors and co-workers and away from their phones and YouTube.
\n\nThis is an opportunity for us to call out the authoritarian project of the Trump administration, the techno-dystopian fantasies of billionaires like Musk, and the complicity of the Democrats who helped make all of this possible. Beyond naming the systems that we are up against, we also need to be clear about our position as workers and how the billionaires running the country want both to hurt us and to weaponize our anger, turning us against each other through propaganda and fearmongering. This is why it’s important to stand in solidarity with everyone attacked by the Trump administration, whether trans folks, migrants, prisoners, or beyond. We can’t leave anyone behind. The only immigrant trying to steal my job is Elon Musk. It’s time to be clear that our interests are not theirs; we must develop and promote our own vision of a better world in total opposition to the ruling class, the billionaires, and their fascist puppets.
\n\nMoreover, it’s time for action. We need to give expression to these antagonisms while revealing the poverty of the institutional forms currently at our disposal—the Democratic party, the ever-shrinking union bureaucracy, the non-profits. We can show examples of past struggles and resistance from the mass wildcat strikes by teachers in West Virginia and the fierce anti-fascist mobilizations against the alt-right to the airport shutdowns following the Muslim Ban. We can support and expand the existing fronts that are already breaking out around us: protests against Musk outside of Tesla, rallies to demand that hospitals continue to treat trans people, community defense and rapid response networks to address ICE attacks, bashing back against the violence of the far right. We can demonstrate the utility of tactics and strategies that others can take up and expand on as all of us figure out how to fight in the new reality.
\n\nIt’s hard to look at the news without imagining tanks on the streets or scenes out of V for Vendetta. But the scenario I worry about most is that this will simply become the new normal. That we will accept this just as we accepted the last round of attacks. As we accepted the genocide in Gaza. As we accepted the ecological gun to our heads that is climate change.
\n\nWhile people are angry and energized, we have a chance to push in a new direction. Let’s use this moment to foster broad and popular networks of resistance that improve our lives, strengthen our communities, and enable us to meet our needs directly. At this point, we don’t have much of a choice.
\n\nLike it or not, this is life now—and it is coming for all of us.
\n\n\nIn October 2019, an Indigenous and popular uprising broke out in Ecuador in response to a package of neoliberal measures imposed by the International Monetary Fund. After twelve days and eleven deaths, they succeeded in forcing the government to cancel the measures and to grant a subsidy to offset the price of fuel. Now, at the end of June 2022, a new general strike is entering its third week in Ecuador, accompanied by new occupations, demonstrations, and clashes. Once again, the strike is led by the Indigenous movement, facing off once more against the policies of the IMF and increasing fuel prices. During the 2019 revolt, we interviewed a comrade in the Primera Linea [the front lines] in Quito to learn about the dynamics of the revolt in the Ecuadorian capital and the self-management and popular power practices of the “Quito Commune.” Two and a half years later, we reached out to him again.
\n\nWhat does it mean that people in Ecuador have to fight this whole battle all over again so soon after a historic victory? Will the momentum spread throughout Latin America again? Read on.
\n\nFor perspective on what a modern-day general strike might look like in the United States, start here.
\n\n![](\"https://cdn.crimethinc.com/assets/articles/2022/06/29/2.jpg\")
\nWhat has happened over the last two and a half years in Ecuador so that, after a pandemic and both parliamentary and presidential elections, everything has returned to this point again?
\n\nAfter the popular insurrection of 2019, [then-president] Lenin Moreno began to raise the price of fuel again gradually—in short, the partial victory of 2019 was annulled and we returned to the starting point. Then the current president, Guillermo Lasso, intensified this, sending fuel prices sky high, which has caused a spike in the prices of basic necessities.
\n\nMoreno managed to complete his term, along with his ministers. Along with the high command of the police and the army, they have gone unpunished for the crimes they committed during the October days.
\n\nThe elections took place in 2021. The candidate of the Indigenous movement was Yaku Pérez, who managed to capitalize on the discontent of October—but that was not enough to make it to the general election and challenge Andres Arauz, the Correist candidate. [Brought to power by the “pink tide” that established left governments throughout Latin America, Rafael Correa served as president of Ecuador from 2007 to 2017; today, accused of corruption, he lives in Belgium.] Guillermo Lasso, a banker, responsible for the bank holiday of 1999, reached the second round and won the elections. [In March 1999, fearing hyperinflation, the Ecuadorian government declared a national bank holiday, which ended up lasting a full week; at the time, Guillermo Lasso was CEO of Banco Guayaquil.]
\n\nThere were also elections in the CONAIE [the Confederation of Indigenous Nationalities of Ecuador]. The winner was Leónidas Iza, leader of the MIC (Indigenous Movement of Cotopaxi) and one of the leaders of the October revolt.
\n\n![](\"https://cdn.crimethinc.com/assets/articles/2022/06/29/1.jpg\")
“Lasso out”: protesters defending themselves from police around the House of Culture in Quito.
\nIn 2019, the uprising in Ecuador helped trigger subsequent uprisings in Chile and elsewhere. Have the movements in Colombia, Chile, and elsewhere in Latin America influenced the movements in Ecuador since then?
\n\nFrom October 2019 on, the populations of several Latin American countries rose up against their governments. However, even though the current events in the country reflect a general, continent-wide crisis and have been decisive in shaping in the collective imaginary, they have clear implications that are tied to the Ecuadorian context. It’s as if something had been left unfinished from the uprising three years ago.
\n\nHow do you see the first year of Lasso’s government? How was it possible for a neoliberal banker to become president after an uprising as strong and successful as the one in 2019? Why has he lost that support so rapidly, so that only one year into power, he faces another popular uprising?
\n\nAppalling. Lasso won thanks to the anti-Correista vote. The scenario would have been different if Yaku Pérez had made it to the second round. Many people voted for Lasso to reject the possible return of the former Citizen Revolution Movement [a party formed by supporters of Rafael Correa]. The divisions within the Indigenous movement contributed to Lasso’s rise to power.
\n\nAs soon as Lasso began his government, he lost his main ally, the Social Christian Party [PSC]. There was immediately conflict with the Constitutional Court. Considering that he is only supported by a minority in the Assembly, this has forced the banker to struggle to figure out how to govern.
\n\nAt first, his main strategy was to arrange the extensive vaccination of the general public, which equipped him with excellent political capital for the first few months. After the pandemic and the vaccination period, the reality of the situation in the country was clear for all to see.
\n\nThe Indigenous movement and several sectors of society sat down to talk with the government twice last year, and the government didn’t listen. What we’re living through now is the result of a lack of response to the demands of Ecuadorian society, which has experienced the raw consequences of poverty, unemployment, destruction of territory, and increased violence in the streets and in jails due to wars between criminal groups. There were four massacres in Ecuadorian prisons (in the last two years, 360 prisoners have been murdered) and contract killings have become an everyday occurrence in the main cities of the country.
\n\nBanks have not canceled the debts of campesinos or workers, despite the pandemic. There can be no economic revival for the poorest because the bankers are suffocating them.
\n\n![](\"https://cdn.crimethinc.com/assets/articles/2022/06/29/3.jpg\")
The graffiti in the background reads “The dead.”
\nThe current National Strike, seen from the outside, seems very similar to the strike of October 2019. What are the similarities and differences?
\n\nThe 2019 uprising was the uprising of the sons and daughters of the first Indigenous uprising of the 1990s. It is a new generation full of rage and thirsty for justice.
\n\nUnlike the previous strike, it was CONAIE, together with other peasant organizations, that declared a national strike beginning on Monday, June 13. Three years ago, it was students and transport workers—bus drivers, taxi drivers, and truckers—who lit the match.
\n\nThis time, the Indigenous communities resisted in their territories for a week before arriving in Quito. The inhabitants of the capital, especially the students and the inhabitants of the poor neighborhoods, had to sustain the strike in the city alone during the first week. The inhabitants of the suburbs of Quito, especially in the south of the city, have fought in their neighborhoods from day one. This didn’t happen three years ago, or at least not as intensely as it is happening now.
\n\nThe repression has been strong, but apart from the events of Friday, June 24, the police and the military have been more strategic in the ways that they have employed force. This is why there was not an explosion in Quito during the first week. There were marches and clashes with the police, but the situation did not get out of control until the arrival of CONAIE.
\n\nDue to political differences with the leaders of CONAIE, the Frente Unitario de Trabajadores (FUT), the main workers’ union, remained out of the demonstrations this year.
\n\nNot even the truck drivers joined.
\n\nHowever, the solidarity of the people has not changed—indeed, it has grown stronger since the last revolt. The comrades are now better organized despite the difficulties caused by the government.
\n\nOn Sunday, June 19, at the end of the first week of the strike, in response to the announcement of the arrival of communities from all over the country in Quito, the military and the National Police ordered the requisition of the Ecuadorian House of Culture (CCE), so that this site could not serve as a meeting point for the demonstrators, unlike in 2019. Consequently, the Central University became the site of the assemblies and the logistical center of the uprising. This has led to clashes not only in the area of the Arbolito [a historic park in the center of Quito], the Parliament, and the historic city center, but also in the area around the Central University.
\n\n\nhttps://twitter.com/PoliciaEcuador/status/1539516832348090369\n\n\n
June 22: Ecuador police complaining that one police unit “has been destroyed and burned in its entirety, as have the patrol cars and motorcycles that were assigned to the service of citizens,” along with a plea for “no more violence.” Pretty rich, coming from those whose profession is to wield violence against the public.
\n\nCan you give a brief description of the events that have occurred in the course of the strike? What are the chief demands—and have they shifted in the course of the mobilization? What strategies and tactics have demonstrators employed?
\n\nThe national strike began on Monday, June 13. On that day, Indigenous and campesino organizations began blocking roads in their territories. In Quito, students organized a march from the Central University to the city center. The blockades were not particularly strong and the mobilization in the city center was repressed.
\n\nThe outlook suggested that the strike would not be as strong as the one that took place in 2019.
\n\nBut in the early hours of Tuesday, June 14, the government made the mistake of illegally arresting CONAIE leader Leónidas Iza, provoking an immediate reaction across the country. This was what lit the fuse, causing the strike to gain momentum. The police held Leónidas Iza hostage for 24 hours and the protest escalated. In Quito, people attacked the Flagrancia Unit [the police unit focusing on “flagrant crimes”—ironically, “flagrant” originally means “on fire”] and set a police vehicle on fire. In Latacunga, the Indigenous movement occupied the headquarters of the Prosecutor’s Office. The next day, Iza was released, but he had to show up every day to sign paperwork in the city of Latacunga.
\n\nStarting on the second day, the neighborhoods of Quito became active, especially in the south of the city and in the northern suburbs. They were repressed for several days, but continued to resist. Quito’s students and social movements marched for five days in support of the national strike. Thursday, June 16, was the day when the largest number of people took to the streets—approximately 10,000 people. The demonstration took the same approach as the previous ones: a march towards the city center, which was violently repressed by the police.
\n\nThe city of Cuenca also took action, and the police attacked the university where the demonstrators had taken refuge. Academic authorities denounced the incident and called for a much bigger march for the next day.
\n\nIn the capital, where dozens of police infiltrators had been following people after the end of the marches and arresting them, people began to organize groups to identify and remove them from the marches. This put a strain on the repressive apparatus of the police. The demonstrators were wary of the police and photos of these infiltrators circulated on social networks. Likewise, before expelling infiltrators, people took photographs of their faces.
\n\nIt is important to understand what the demands of this national strike are. People are presenting ten demands to the government.
\n\nThese include lower fuel prices; a banking moratorium so that people can reactivate the economy without the pressure of the bank vultures; a halt to exploiting and destroying the territories where there are water sources and where communities live; mechanisms such as prior consultation in the territories where mining or oil extraction is planned.
\n\nAnother demand is to declare a state of emergency in public health and education. Both sectors have been attacked by the government’s neoliberal policies and have seen their budgets shrink.
\n\nFair prices for agricultural products so that farmers can receive what their work is worth. A stricter control by the government on basic necessities, in view of rampant speculation.
\n\nA halt to the privatization of strategic sectors including social security, the Banco del Pacífico, the CNT (National Telecommunications Corporation), and highways. Respect for the 21 collective rights of Indigenous organizations and bilingual education.
\n\nThe last demand is to guarantee the safety of citizens, given the wave of violence in the streets and in the country’s prisons.
\n\nAll these demands are shared by the people who are supporting the national strike.
\n\nAfter five days, faced with the indifference of the government, the Indigenous and campesino movement decided to go to Quito. On Friday, June 17, the government declared a state of emergency in the provinces that were seeing the most unrest and enacted a curfew in Quito from 10 pm to 5 am. On Sunday, June 19, they ordered the requisition of the House of Culture and violently occupied it to prevent people from organizing. Blockading and clashes between residents of Quito’s southern districts and the police continued throughout the weekend.
\n\nOn Monday, June 20, the first caravans of the Indigenous movement began to arrive in the north and south of the capital and were violently repressed. Meanwhile, the students of the Central University and the social movements of Quito occupied the university so that those who were arriving would have a safe place to sleep and organize. In the evening, trucks full of demonstrators began to arrive one by one, but police harassed them from all sides in hopes of preventing them from reaching the city.
\n\nOnly two universities have opened their doors to the Indigenous movement.
\n\nSince the House of Culture was in the hands of the police, the operational center of the national strike shifted to the Central University for the first time. Here, people began to organize the first solidarity kitchens, childcare centers, medical brigades, and storage centers, and the front lines of resistance.
\n\nFrom the morning of Tuesday, June 21, clashes with the police began throughout the northern part of central Quito. The death toll was already rising, eventually reaching five victims. Police threw one demonstrator into a ravine; another, in the province of Puyo, was killed by a tear gas canister that lodged in his skull; others in Quito were killed by buckshot.
\n\nOn Thursday, June 23, a gigantic march took back the House of Culture and the El Arbolito park, and the main assemblies returned to the historic site of the Ecuadorian left. The conflict immediately shifted to the area around the park and the entrances to the National Assembly. Having much more experience this time than during the previous strike, the front lines have been better organized and protected.
\n\nIn the district of San Antonio, in the north of Quito, residents attacked the army when it tried to enter the area to crack down on the demonstrators. One comrade was killed by a shot from the military.
\n\n![](\"https://cdn.crimethinc.com/assets/articles/2022/06/29/4.jpg\")
“Lasso, you fucked with my people—you messed up.”
\nOn Friday, June 24, Guillermo Lasso made a broadcast on national television authorizing the police to increase their repressive force. An hour later, the police and the army indiscriminately attacked the House of Culture and the Arbolito, causing a mass escape from the area. Many children and elderly people suffocated as a result of police violence.
\n\nWe were all chased all over the place until we left the area. Dozens of people were arrested and injured. However, the police withdrew from the area in the evening.
\n\nThis weekend, many comrades have returned to their communities, while others are arriving. Collective cleaning tasks have been organized and priority has been given to assemblies to organize the third week of the national strike. On Saturday, June 25, there was a massive march of women and dissidents.
\n\nToday, Sunday, June 26, there are concerts and sports activities at the Central University. An artistic and cultural festival will be held in the House of Culture.
\n\nHowever, the minimum condition for dialogue is an immediate reduction in fuel prices.
\n\nWhich social sectors have mobilized in Ecuador? What social and political alliances have they created?
\n\nThe Indigenous and peasant movements have mobilized, along with the students and the neighborhoods of Quito. The Indigenous and peasant movements are historically the most organized; the students and neighborhoods have become active again in this situation. The neighborhoods of Quito are the surprise of this strike; they have shown a high level of organization and control of the territory.
\n\nMany comrades throughout the country are supporting the national strike, and it is in this context that the main alliances have been woven. Many of them were not organizing together before due to ideological differences, but those have been set aside in view of the importance of the moment. Although not strong enough yet, the social movement has matured enormously, especially in Quito.
\n\nHow do you evaluate the role of CONAIE in this national strike? Has it managed to assert itself as the main protagonist of social opposition to the neoliberal order? Has it succeeded in establishing social alliances beyond the indigenous world?
\n\nCONAIE continues to be the country’s chief political entity and one of the most important in Latin America. Their organizational capacity and collective strength continue to amaze. However, the internal fractures have taken a toll: the force that they have managed to field this time is less than that of 2019. Still, the comrades continue to put their bodies on the line for everyone.
\n\nIt is not easy to come to sleep on cardboard on the floor in coliseums for days. Their determination is amazing.
\n\nBeyond the alliances they may or may not have generated, they are recognized by all as the foremost defenders of the collective rights of Ecuadorian society. What is missing is for the urban social movements to coordinate more with the Indigenous movement and for the latter to learn from the urban movements as well. There is still no assembly in which social collectives can make decisions about what is happening. They are involved in day-to-day organization, they participate in small assemblies, but it has not been possible, for example, to create an assembly that brings together all the social movements of Quito and the front lines that are supporting this national strike.
\n\n![](\"https://cdn.crimethinc.com/assets/articles/2022/06/29/5.jpg\")
\nHow do you see the role of CONAIE leader Leonidas Iza, who emerged in October 2019 as a prominent figure from the left of the Indigenous organization and ultimately became its president? How do you understand Iza’s arrest on the second day of the strike? Is he playing more of an agitator or moderator role in the context of social protest? Does he have goals in electoral politics?
\n\nLeónidas Iza is the absolute leader of the national strike. CONAIE now has a leader with clear political ideas and excellent preparation. His ideas are more radical than those of his predecessors. This caused him problems within the movement, but at the same time aroused a lot of sympathy.
\n\nAs I mentioned at the beginning, Iza’s arrest was the trigger that gave force to the national strike.
\n\nThe problem is that Iza’s leadership, intentionally or not, is overshadowing other social and Indigenous leaders. The media also helped centralize all attention on him. He has both moderated and also agitated this movement, depending on the moment.
\n\nThe Indigenous movement wants to have the first Indigenous president in the history of the country, so one way or another, at some point everything that is happening will be capitalized on in electoral politics. I don’t know if Iza or someone else will do it, but this is undeniable.
\n\nWhat role is Correism playing in this national strike?
\n\nJust like three years ago, they participate, but they do not have the slightest control over what is happening. They support the national strike and want to topple Lasso, which is why they were the ones who called the plenary session of the Assembly to discuss the possibility of impeachment on account of nationwide chaos.
\n\n![](\"https://cdn.crimethinc.com/assets/articles/2022/06/29/6.jpg\")
\nIt seems that a request for impeachment (muerte cruzada) is being processed in the National Assembly. How likely is this to happen? Is it realistic to anticipate the fall of Lasso, either through parliament or social protest? What can we expect next, a new government elected by Parliament or new elections? Is this something that the movements seek, or do they fear that the political order will reestablish itself in a new form? What prospects are opening up and what opportunities are closing?
\n\nFourteen days have passed and the government still manages to keep itself on its feet with various tricks. The repression that occurred on Friday was a hard blow for everyone.
\n\nThe Indigenous movement has asked its political arm, Pachakutic, to vote in favor of impeachment as an alternative and a way out of the current crisis, if the government fails to respond to the ten demands. They cannot return home with empty pockets; five comrades have already lost their lives.
\n\nUnseating Lasso would not change things, because his vice president would take power and continue the same political project. But it would still set an important new precedent regarding the ability of social movements to obtain results, even if they are only partial.
\n\nThere is not enough force yet to bend Guillermo Lasso, so impeachment has been considered as an option.
\n\nHowever, as I write this, there are still not enough votes to topple the president via impeachment. Yesterday, Lasso strategically withdrew the State of Emergency so as not to justify a national crisis.
\n\n![](\"https://cdn.crimethinc.com/assets/articles/2022/06/29/7.jpg\")
\nWe rose up again. This time, we have more experience, but not enough strength to achieve our objectives. We are resisting and defending ourselves from police and state violence, one day at a time.
\n\nTomorrow, Monday, June 27, a new week of unemployment begins, which will be decisive. We will see if additional subjects and social forces will join in, if the strength in the neighborhoods will increase, if new collective strategies of struggle will emerge, if it will be possible to put the government in difficulty again. Everything is still unknown; what is certain is that resistance continues and we will not give up.
\n\nWe are also aware that this uprising is not going to change the country’s problems at the root, but we know that the next revolt will be better because we are already building that possibility here. The organizational processes that have emerged and that sustain the strike (popular kitchens, medical brigades, front lines, daycare centers for children) are being organized and that fabric is what will remain after all this is over.
\n\nThe rage is great—and so is the desire to win. We continue in the fight, we do not give up.
\n\nWe continue the fight, we do not falter.
\n\nTo learn more about the struggle in Ecuador, we recommend the news sources Wambra radio, Indymedia Ecuador, Conaie comunicación, Acapana, and revista crisis.
\n\n\nhttps://twitter.com/CONAIE_Ecuador/status/1541849225641738240\n\n\n
“The government breaks off dialogue, confirming its authoritarianism, lack of will, and incapacity. Lasso Guillermo is responsible for the consequences of his belligerent policy. We demand respect for our maximum leader. Lasso doesn’t break up with Leonidas, he breaks up with the people.”
\n\nThe Uprising in Ecuador: Inside the Quito Commune—An Interview from on the Front Lines
\n\n\nhttps://twitter.com/submedia/status/1541850003504775168\n \n
All around the world, as the compromises that stabilized capitalism through the 20th century collapse, people are facing increasingly authoritarian measures from governments of all stripes. In this context, it is essential for social movements in different settings to learn from each other, in order to develop a worldwide resistance to capitalism and the state structures that impose it. In this interview, two Iranian radicals explore what kinds of radical organizing and theorizing are taking place in Iran today in the context of recent protest movements and state repression.
\n\nThe photographs show contemporary political graffiti in Iran, courtesy of anarchist comrades in Tehran.
\n\nThis interview started as a conversation between a few comrades. What was originally intended as a conversation over the course of a few weeks became three months of stealing time in order to scramble to write down some thoughts while confronting state repression at the hands of the Iranian regime. Despite this delay, this interview’s main purpose has remained unchanged since the outset: to educate and update comrades in the global North on the current state of affairs in Iran, the years of struggle from 2015-2018 that culminated in a nationwide strike wave, how the COVID-19 pandemic has affected social movements, the ongoing effects of austerity measures and international sanctions, and the government’s response to both protest and increased geopolitical tensions ever since the United States withdrew its support for the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (i.e., the “Iran Nuclear Deal”) in May 2018.
\n\nThe identities of the two comrades will remain anonymous in light of the threat of repression at the hands of the Iranian government.
\n\n![](\"https://cdn.crimethinc.com/assets/articles/2020/10/08/1.jpg\")
“Aban 98”—a reference to the November 2019 protests according to Persian calendar.
\nHere in the US, media coverage has been dominated by two events: the COVID-19 global pandemic and the recent anti-police uprising that broke out in response to the police killing of George Floyd on May 25. Considering that the US media provides little information regarding the day-to-day lives of Iranians and the cycle of struggles that have spread across the country in the recent years, it is safe to say that the American public and US leftists are largely in the dark as to what it means to live and struggle in Iran today. Could you begin by educating us on the composition and various currents within the Iranian left as it currently exists? How have various groups and organizations responded to the compounding effects of the economic, political, and epidemiological crises?
\n\nJ: Let me begin by commenting on your initial point, which is true of course. The suffering of daily life in Iran is underrepresented, not only in the US media, but in all the international media that has been hooked on Iranian news of secret explosions, nuclear controversies, military tensions with the US and its allies, etc. The grand politics is blind to that suffering; so is the mainstream media. And the situation has only gotten worse in recent months. The national currency is devaluing as fast as the cost of the essential goods and services are rising. Unemployment is widespread. The rate of suicides has increased. There is a shortage of medicine for different chronic illnesses. Housing prices have skyrocketed. People in big cities, especially Tehran, have resorted to tragically “innovative” solutions for housing: living in temporary tents, living in basic shelter-like structures, renting the rooftops of other houses and apartments and setting up their tents there, living in their personal cars… According to official statistics, at least one third of the urban population is living in slums.
\n\nNow, let me come back to your question. To talk about leftist organizations in a “common sense” meaning is hard in the context of Iran. The Islamic Republic considers any sustainable oppositional collectivity a threat. Even if you are organized for watching movies, reading books, etc., there is a fair chance of being called for interrogation. Still, in such an atmosphere, we have seen a multiplication of efforts in organization among factory workers, teachers, nurses, truck drivers, railway workers, and other so-called essential workers. Moreover, the leftist student movement has reorganized itself in recent years and also created the most viral slogans of the recent protests. There is a women’s movement involving a wide range of political positions that has been suppressed heavily as it has asserted itself more forcefully in recent years. If we focus on a generic term like “leftist politics” in Iran, considering leftist here as inspired by various Marxist traditions, then we can point out four trends: syndicalism, left nationalism, anti-neoliberalism, and anti-imperialism. It is not the best categorization in many senses and there are intersections between these trends, but as I’ll explain further, it will serve our purpose to map the leftist politics in Iran.
\n\nThere are two trends of syndicalism among organized labor in Iran. Haft-Tappeh Sugar Cane Factory Workers Independent Syndicate is one notable example. The workers of Haft Tappeh industrial complex in the south of Iran, Khuzestan province, have organized themselves autonomously and fought a hard battle in recent years, with all their main organizers arrested and some forced to confess on national TV. Forced televised confessions have long served as a strategy of suppression in the Islamic Republic. However, their struggle against the privatization of the company and the corruption of the owners, managers, and officials still continues to this day. They have called for workers’ management of the factory and its resources. They also exemplify a grassroots, non-hierarchical, and autonomous organization. They elect the representatives of the syndicate, but the representatives do not decide on behalf of the workers and all the decisions regarding the management and owners’ propositions in negotiations with them are put before a form of worker’s general assembly to be discussed and accepted or rejected. Haft Tappeh syndicate is the embodiment of a syndicalism that is local and remains local, with an insistence of local, autonomous workers management.
\n\nAnother form of syndicalism is exemplified by the Free Trade Union of Iran. The leaders of this worker’s union have also all been arrested and prosecuted. They call for a countrywide union and independent organization of workers in each local context, but they have a more top-down organizational structure and do not focus primarily on local context.
\n\nLeft nationalism has also its different trends. Some are the heirs to the communist party line in the beginning of 1980s, ideologically close to the Soviets, but also supporting the Islamic Republic government (which intersects here with what I mentioned as anti-imperialism). These leftists focus on “national security” and “national interests” and defending the national integrity in the sense of borders. A part of them have problems with minorities’ movements, such as Kurds or Arabs, and sometimes brand them as “separatists.” Another part in the opposition would even work with right-wing opposition parties or royalists in order to form a “national” coalition against the Islamic Republic.
\n\nAnti-imperialism has been on the rise in recent years, in light of the tensions with the US and the probability of a war. But the anti-imperialist left now has two distinct lines: one that is defined solely by its anti-imperialism and one that has anti-imperialism as part of its discourse. While both are largely theoretical currents, the latter is mostly a form of contemporary critical theory and the former is a return of the mainstream communist discourse of the 1970s and ’80s, which would make a coalition with the Islamic Republic against American imperialism. Those anti-imperialists now defend the Islamic Republic and its interventions in Syria and Iraq and elsewhere. Not unlike the “official” communist party in Syria itself, which first backed Assad’s brutal performativization of endocolonialism [colonization of the interior of the country] and counterrevolution and lost many of their members to the waves of revolution. The ultra right-wing opposition, chiefly composed of royalists supporting the Trump administration and being supported by it, showcases this current of Iranian leftism in their propagandas to demonize the left as a whole.
\n\nAnti-neoliberalism is an umbrella term for another heterogeneous trend of leftist thought in Iran: from student activists who clearly call their struggle “against neoliberalism” and show solidarity with similar movements against neoliberal economic policies and governmentality in France and Lebanon and Chile, to fractions of the syndicalist left, to other groups and circles who mostly work in the field of contemporary theory, critical theory, and political economy.
\n\nThere are other forces that cannot be captured in my schematization of the Iranian left—the different forces among minority militants: Kurds, Arabs, Balochis, etc. We should also consider that there is a divide between a left more prone to action/praxis and a left more inclined to theory/writing (sometimes dubbed “cultural” Marxists1). Another divide comes about from the general perspective of these political positions regarding the question of the state: is retaking power and reimagining the state’s functionality necessary for an emancipatory politics or should any emancipatory political movement go beyond the question of the state and its hierarchical organization? There is also a general divide on this issue between the leftists inside Iran and outside Iran.
\n\nNow, there are instances of solidarity among some of these trends. One example was a statement that many leftists, from different political positions and standpoints, signed after the coronavirus crisis, calling for a redistribution of wealth, universal healthcare, freedom for political prisoners as well as other prisoners accused of non-violent crimes, social housing, special attention to slums, and so on.
\n\nWith a few individual exceptions, all the forces on the left oppose the US sanctions and its policy of regime change in Iran. Not because those forces do not want to topple down the theocratic regime, but because the American government has shown its support for the most neoliberal, right-wing, nationalist forces in the opposition and after all, no good comes of neo-colonial foreign interventions—as in the cases of West Asia and North Africa, for example.
\n\nJ-P: Of course, it is comprehensible that the media pay so much attention to significant events such as the pandemic or the anti-racist protests across the US. The problem, though, lies with the approach and their representation of these events. I believe you know well that the revolution will not be televised, not in the US, and certainly not in the Middle East. But that is not the issue here.
\n\nThe reason you feel that you are left in the dark and need educating on this matter, is partly due to the incoherent situation of various currents within the Iranian left. This dispersed condition could be considered as a strategy for survival, since any sort of articulation or mediation between these currents is interrupted by all means necessary. But it also presents an obstacle that the Iranian left has to overcome if it wants to make any sort of concrete change. Moreover, this situation implies that we too share the necessity of educating ourselves on this issue, and we are seeking answers to similar questions. Most importantly, this diffused condition makes it impossible to claim a true image of all the currents within the left, since each component will know better about their immediate field of action, and may neglect some other components. So, instead of making a detailed list, we need to start from the whole picture of the Iranian left. There is a huge gap between what the Iranian left actually is today, and the promising potential it bears for a radical change in the region.
\n\nIf you look at the actual position of the left today, you will recognize various intellectual and discursive improvements concerning issues such as gender, precarity, minorities, etc. But this has no actual effect on the outcome of so many crucial issues, from the coronavirus to sanctions, from the suppression of minorities to traditionally left issues such as minimum wage. There is no need to mention that we live and struggle in an overdetermined situation with so many domestic and foreign agents who, despite their divergent and differing interests, are ultimately integrated in their opposition to the left. So, it is inevitable that the left, lacking a sustainable organization or a tangible program, does not play a dominant role in immediate matters. But looking at the course of events, and in light of the multiple and compounding effects of different crises—from political legitimacy, to satisfying basic needs, from social issues to natural disasters such as earthquakes—and waking up to a new crisis every day, you will realize that none of those agents can present a coherent response to all these matters. The left, on the other hand, despite its organizational incoherency, is creating a discourse that could address our social, political, and cultural problems alike. This is the reason why our government is promoting a counterfeit leftist image of itself, commonly referred to as the “axis of resistance.” But that is such an important issue that we will discuss it separately.
\n\nAs for the composition and currents within the Iranian left, and as ill-fitting as it may seem, the categories that the government uses to classify these currents could be a revealing starting point about the dynamics within them. Not long ago, the intelligence services had three categories for all leftist activists. First, what they called the “workers’ left,” apparently referring to leftist currents among workers; then there was the “Marxist Left,” which mainly referred to organized activists usually associated with leftist parties; and finally, there was the “cultural left” sometimes referred to as the “new left,” which were the intellectuals, usually based in bigger cities, sometimes having connections with other components of civil movements. They had a clear conception of the potentials of these categories—and, of course, of how to suppress each of them.
\n\nBut since 2017, a change in the internal dynamics of these categories, combined with an increasing popularity of the left among other activists and progressive forces, has rendered this conception obsolete. Since then, the so-called cultural left has taken an active part in workers’ demonstrations, the so-called Marxist left has adopted new approaches towards “unorganized” masses, and the workers’ left is waging a new level of struggle relying on their comrades outside the workplace. Hence, the composition of the Iranian left is a work in progress, and it has yet so many new meanings to unfold. What can be said for certain is the old (self-) conception is irrelevant to the new path that the left has been making since 2017. Today, one can observe a strong leftist current in most of the organizations and affinity groups; among teachers, workers, students, women activists, intellectuals, etc. It seems that people are less obsessed with their identity as “left,” but leftist currents and tendencies are taking the initiative in many of these groups.
\n\n![](\"https://cdn.crimethinc.com/assets/articles/2020/10/08/2.jpg\")
“Bank accounts are full of blood.”
\nWhat was the outcome of the 2018 wave of strike actions that took place throughout the whole of Iran—involving the Haft Tapeh Sugar Cane worker in the north, workers at National Steel of Ahvaz in the south, and the nation’s truck drivers, who organized three nationwide strikes? At the time, it seemed that this cycle of struggle was conditioned by two key factors, both of which have much to do with the question of the global flow of capital towards finance and liquidity (the twin indicators that capital has shifted away from production and toward circulation): the United States’ economic sanctions that resulted from its withdrawal from the Iran Nuclear Agreement in 2019 and the depression of the Rial on the global market. Would we be right in saying that these were key factors that led to the strike wave? And how has the situation in the country changed since then, especially with the compounding effects of the sanctions alongside the COVID-19 pandemic?
\n\nJ: The anti-Western discourse of the Islamic Republic should fool no one. From its Supreme Leader Khamenei to its president Rouhani, the regime supports the free market economy and a large-scale privatization plan that has been in play for decades. It is one of the largest in the region, beside Turkey, Pakistan, and recently, Saudi Arabia. The Iranian regime has always wanted to join the World Trade Organization and has followed the World Bank and International Monetary Fund (IMF) restructuring programs. The impact of such neoliberal policies is visible in “reforming” the healthcare system, the housing sector, the pension system, the de-subsidization of energy units, a strong move towards privatization through the stock exchange market, exponential growth of financial institutions and private banking, drafting austerity budgets, and massive lay-offs in formerly state-owned factories and large companies.
\n\nThis is the situation that served as the backdrop for the wave of strikes that you mention. This is a cycle of struggle that started around 2015 and saw an intensification of daily actions among the workers affected by those policies, the citizens that have been indebted or literally robbed by the new private financial institutions (which are connected to the Revolutionary Guards and went bankrupt in a few years), minorities and marginalized communities whose livelihood were endangered by anti-environmental development policies or simply negligence by the central government, and others. Reports had shown a daily average of six to eight local protests across the whole country during that period.
\n\nIt is true that the US sanctions contributed to the protests, but in an indirect way. The sanctions made daily life much harder and deprived the government of its financial resources. But as I said, the neoliberalization and gradual dismantling of the semi-welfare state that was established after the revolution should be seen as the main cause of the protests. As one famous slogan of the Aban protests formulated it: “Our enemy is here/they lie that it is in the US.”
\n\nNow, I mentioned the semi-welfare state that was established after the revolution… there is an important consideration here. Even if there was a kind of welfare system for ordinary citizens, it was like any other racialized state that did so at the expense of the minorities. Baloch, Arab, and Kurdish areas are much more underdeveloped, and the environmental issues resulting from unsustainable development in favor of the center are worse. The deep roots of identity-based (religious or ethnic) discriminations are another cause for social protests.
\n\nAs you rightly mentioned, the COVID-19 epidemic and its related economic challenges have intensified discontent. But the Iranian government, already in the midst of an economic crisis, reopened the economy much sooner than it had to, and the workers have had to work despite the coronavirus threat. This is another sign of the Iranian government’s neoliberal approach to social problems, in which it reduces all aspects of life to the exchange economy. However, the crisis has led to the intensification of protests from health workers and nurses, who were employed on 89-day contracts during pandemic without any recognizable benefits for such hard work.
\n\nRight now, protests are raging again in Iran. Haft-Tappeh workers are on their 78th day of strike, and their main demand is the cancellation of privatization, among other demands regarding wage and job security and health insurance. Additionally, some workers in oil fields have staged strikes. Factory workers in Tabriz, Arak, Mahshahr, and Asaluyeh, among others, railway workers in Tehran and Khorasan and Semnan, teachers and municipality workers and many others are protesting on a daily basis again. The left in Iran is careful to keep its distance from any American initiative against the Islamic Republic and it rightly rejects sanctions and any idea of foreign intervention. When a group from the royalist pro-Trump opposition began to voice support for the Haft-Tappeh struggle, the telegram channel of striking workers published a post rejecting their support, saying, “You are an agent of states, not a supporter of people.”
\n\nJ-P: Let me start answering this question with a popular meme that became viral before the new wave of sanctions. The first image was an old apparently underprivileged elderly man sitting on some stairs with a look of utmost despair. The caption read “before the nuclear deal.” Underneath was the exact same photo with the caption “after the nuclear deal.” Today, you can add the same photo with the caption “post-post-nuclear-deal.”
\n\nThe sanctions are not the root of the problem; they just intensify the situation. Privatization and the instructions of the IMF are the key factors that led to the strike wave. The policies started immediately after the war between Iran and Iraq (1988), and they have grown hand-in-hand with unimaginable corruption ever since. The problems in both of the companies that you mentioned (both are situated in the south of Iran) started after they were handed over to the private sector. The documents regarding how and under what conditions Haft Tapeh was handed over still remain confidential; today, as the new wave of strikes takes place in Haft Tapeh (and they have marched in the city of Shush for three months now), the workers had to stop the robber-baron owner from selling the equipment of the company. Some scholars like Mehrdad Vahabi call this the “predatory state” that coexisted with some capitalist aspects of our society.
\n\nSo the predatory state and so-called privatization, the key factors of working-class degradation, were going on before the sanctions and continued after them. The problem with sanctions is that they are aimed at the genuine potential of our society to make a radical change. They are designed to put the pressure on the masses—to render it even harder to organize—and they provide the best excuse for vast domestic repression and a suitable platform for the ever-increasing corruption of the robber barons.
\n\n![](\"https://cdn.crimethinc.com/assets/articles/2020/10/08/3.jpg\")
“Bread, work, freedom—fight until liberation.”
\nHow has the Iranian government responded to the pandemic? What effects have US sanctions had on the government’s response? And has the pandemic afforded the Iranian left new avenues of mobilization and new lines of alliance?
\n\nJ: As I briefly said in response to the previous question, the government policy was that exchange value is more important than the value of human life. But this is not at all unique to the Islamic government, just like the many flaws and cover-ups in dealing with the coronavirus crisis. To mention just a few, the government has hidden the real official statistics, as leaked documents have shown. The official yet unannounced death toll is three times greater than the statistics made public, and the number of the patients also nears the same ratio. The virus was already in Iran around the time Wuhan was quarantined in China, but because the government-organized demonstrations for the anniversary of the 1979 Revolution as well as the parliamentary election were ahead, they did not report it to the public, according to those leaked documents. At the same time, the government did not provide financial relief or assistance to citizens, nor did it provide necessary services to the mostly Afghan refugees and immigrants who lack proper documents.
\n\nThe US sanctions have had an effect on the response to COVID-19 in Iran. Washington says that the sanctions do not block medicine and medical equipment and other humanitarian imports. Technically, it is true. But their secondary sanctions on financial transactions with Iranian banks, their ruthless prosecution of the traders and the necessity to apply for exemption for “humanitarian” trade with Iran have made many exporters of medical equipment afraid of doing business with Iran. According to the US Treasury statistics, the number of applications for sanction exemption in the case of medical trade with Iran has decreased from 220 in the last quarter of 2016 (Obama’s last quarter) to only 36 cases in the first quarter of 2019, the last available data on the issue.
\n\nBut again, the difficulties resulting from the US sanctions should not blind us to the decades-long neoliberalization of Iranian economy, the cuts in the health care budget and the increases in the military budget, the commercialization of health care, the precaritization of essential workers, and the like. Regarding the last point in the question, I cannot give a definite answer. In the beginning of the epidemic, new collective and local initiatives emerged providing care and support. But the intensification of the crisis made them weaker. The pandemic in Iran, as in many other places in the world, has shed light on the structural violence caused by class-based inequalities, neoliberalization, and various forms of discrimination.
\n\nDoes this necessary translate into any sort of widespread social solidarity? Che Guevara says: “solidarity represents the affection of peoples” and Massumi describes such affective solidarity as a “belonging in becoming.” The situation in Iran, considering this point of view, does not translate into a mass revolutionary becoming, a widespread solidarity. Social divisions are heightened; the fragmentation of productive social forces, which Negri calls “making salami out of social flesh,” is overwhelming. And a revolutionary movement so powerful that it can bring all the differences towards a strategic struggle with the regime is yet to come.
\n\nJ-P: The government’s response to the pandemic was basically similar to other right-wing governments around the globe. At first, they were also in a state of surprise, denying the existence or later the significance of the pandemic. Later, they reorganized themselves to let the public deal with this problem on their own, and they even blamed the public for the pandemic. So, there was no official quarantine announced, since the government would have to take minimal responsibilities, and since then, they have only considered the needs of big businesses.
\n\nOur particular problems around this issue stems from two factors. One is the ideological elements that are vital to the power structure—for instance, these days we have the Moharram ceremony, a sort of carnival with no social distancing, and it was the government that decided to hold this ceremony. The other factor is the privatization of the health system and other forms of reproductive or care work, which makes collective self-care even more difficult.
\n\nThe sanctions are part of the negotiating process between the political and economic elite; they have no tangible effects on this issue. Moreover, with or without sanctions, the position of the public facing the pandemic would not improve. On the other hand, the left has undergone devastating burdens. As part of our vulnerable public, the left had to deal with the pandemic on its own (we lost a credible and influential icon, Fariborz Raees-Danna, to the virus); the economic pressure and unemployment has kept the Iranian left busy making ends meet, and this will only get worse; and the lack of coherent policies has made it impossible for the left and other progressive forces to hold meetings or even to meet each other indoors. So there have been no particular avenues or possibilities for the left, but the pandemic has escalated various gaps, most importantly between the government and the people.
\n\n![](\"https://cdn.crimethinc.com/assets/articles/2020/10/08/5.jpg\")
“Execution is premeditated state murder.”
\nIn your opinion, what are some of the major consequences of the February elections? If we understand the series of events correctly, there is a second round of voting that has been postponed till September due to the pandemic. In the interim, what do you see as some of the key factors that led to a favorable outcome for the “hardlined” or principalist faction? And what has been the response from the Left, whether parliamentary or extra-parliamentary?
\n\nJ: I mentioned that the Islamic Republic covered up the spread of virus in its early stage in order to do the parliamentary election; it was confirmed only the night before the polling. Why? Because the Guardian Council of the Constitution, a governmental body close to the Supreme Leader, made sure that conservatives would dominate the parliament by disqualifying even many “non-threatening” reformists, too. Conservatives won the election with the lowest participation rate in the history of the Islamic Republic. Now the head of the parliament is the former mayor of Tehran, a former Revolutionary Guard commander and former chief police, who has been accused of immense corruption but is very loyal to the Supreme Leader.
\n\nThe unified conservative parliament is one of the pieces of the puzzle in the “transition period,” referring to the selection of the next Supreme Leader. And the puzzle is a unified conservative government, homogeneous enough to ensure that the transition to the new Supreme Leader goes smoothly. The parliament, all the institutions of the so-called “republic,” and its representation apparatus are all defunct. The crisis in the Islamic Republic is no longer about “legitimacy”—it is a crisis at the roots of governmentality itself. One of the main slogans of the movements of the past three years was “Reformist, conservative—it is the endgame.” The slogan is an echo of similar slogans shouted at Syntagma Square in Athens or “Puerta del Sol” in Madrid or in the streets of Beirut regarding all parties and representatives: “All of you out.” So the left has not participated in the elections, and historically, it does not participate. There was a brief moment in 2016, in City Council Elections, that a kind of social democratic left formed a list and tried to get into the Council, but the conventional reformists won overwhelmingly and those leftists did not receive so many votes really.
\n\nAt this point, it might be instructive to explain the political forces in the Islamic Republic in order to be clear about all the terms we use here in an international context, because in post-revolutionary Iran they have a particular meaning.
\n\nThe Islamic Republic of Iran (IRI) consolidated its power by violently suppressing both right-wing liberals and left-wing socialists and communists. However, up to Mohammad Khatami’s surprise win in the 1997 presidential elections, the main political tendencies in post-revolutionary Iran had been called “the Left” and “the Right.” The differences between these two political currents inside the Islamic Republic elite came to the forefront after the impeachment and subsequent escape of Abolhassan Banisadr, the first elected president.
\n\nThe right wing of the IRI consisted of traditional merchants (Bazaaris), traditional clergy, and opponents of land reforms and critics of state interventionism in the economy. The left wing of the Islamic Republic had the support of Ruhollah Khomeini in the first years of the revolution. They called for the redistribution of wealth through subsidies, direct distribution of essential goods, and implementing heavy regulations on the free markets. Both political wings supported Islamization, the Guardianship of the Islamic Jurist (Velayat-e-Faghih), and anti-imperialist discourses.
\n\nThe third parliament was controlled by the left. However, after Khomeini’s death and Khamenei’s ascent to supreme leadership as a right-winger, the left became weaker and weaker. The fourth and fifth parliaments were controlled by the right. After Khatami’s election in 1997, the duality between left and right was reformulated in another duality, reformists versus conservatives (or principalists). The past differences between left and right in terms of economic policies are no longer a dividing issue here, as many reformists and conservatives are now advocates of the free market, globalized trade, and privatization.
\n\nJ-P: The elections in Iran have always been systematically unfair. In this context, only national elections (such as presidential elections) could make a slight difference. These elections used to be a medium to solve or postpone internal disagreements and contradictions within the ruling class by referring the matter to the public (usually mobilizing their dissent and rage against a group of political elites). Although this process used to be designed and engineered carefully, it still provided some semblance of political expression for our civil society.
\n\nThis mediatory process was annulled with the 2009 presidential election. On the one hand, the internal contradictions among the political and economic elite became so apparent that they could not fit even in an unfair election, and on the other hand, the internal gap was projected into a larger gap between the people and the government as a whole. Henceforth, the elections have been a series of attempts at healing the fracture, mostly within the ruling class, and sometimes with a select part of our civil society—namely, the urban middle class in the subsequent presidential election.
\n\nWithin this history, one could say that the February elections, by themselves, do not play a significant role and the second round will even be less significant. But they do mark a turning point in the integrity of the ruling political elite. Note that today, the so-called rivals in the previous presidential elections are the heads of the executive, judiciary, and legislative administrations. The February elections marked the ending point in this integration process—which does not mean that their internal conflict of interests is solved, of course. The heads of the three branches have already made extrajudicial decisions, one of which was the increase in petrol prices last November that resulted in an unprecedented national uprising and a bloodbath in which protesters were killed. The upcoming presidential elections will probably announce the indisputable annulment of any reference to the ballot box.
\n\nAs for the response of the left, I should remark that the terms parliamentary and extra-parliamentary do not apply to the Iranian left, since they are not recognized under any circumstances and since 1983 all left organizations have been considered illegal. But looking back at the December-January 2017 uprising, protestors forged a slogan that articulates the left’s stand on this issue: “Reformists and hardliners, your show is over!” This slogan, which became widely popular, indicated that the people are disinterested in the internal conflicts of the ruling elite. Of course, these conflicts, time and again, provide an opportunity for a political outlet of the people, but neither of the two factions represents the people’s interest.
\n\n![](\"https://crimethinc.com/rails/active_storage/blobs/eyJfcmFpbHMiOnsibWVzc2FnZSI6IkJBaHBBcUFDIiwiZXhwIjpudWxsLCJwdXIiOiJibG9iX2lkIn19--f5ebee2836cb7e5db144396d5d45071b084e0a08/against-all-wars-farsi_front_black_and_white.jpg\")
“Against all wars—against all governments—against all oppression”: a CrimethInc. poster translated by anarchists in Iran.
\nOver the past few months, images and articles have made the connection between policing here in the United States, in Hong Kong, and in Palestine. Has the news of the anti-police uprising here in the States encouraged or informed the strategy of the left, as it currently exists, in Iran? How has the Iranian government responded to, or reported on, the ongoing uprising here?
\n\nJ: Iran’s Radio and Television is under the exclusive control of the Supreme Leader and they always broadcast any kind of crisis, protest, and scandal in the US. The left were inspired to point out the same discrimination against Afghan immigrants in Iran and supported their “Afghan lives matter,” but this did not go beyond social media hashtags. The communication between the protest movements in the US and the Iranian left has been mostly an emotional one, not a transmission of tactics or strategies. The same goes for the protest movement in Hong Kong.
\n\nPalestine, however, is different. Traditionally, it holds a special status among the Iranian left. Many left guerrilla fighters against the Shah’s dictatorship were trained by the Palestinians or worked with organizations fighting for the cause of Palestine. Now, for a part of the people, supporting Palestine means supporting the Islamic Republic, as Tehran has financially supported Hezbollah, Lebanon, and Hamas after the revolution.
\n\nJ-P: Methods of policing, control, and repression are increasingly circulating among the ruling classes of the globe, just as protest tactics and news of uprisings are circulating and people are inspired and encouraged by other protests worldwide. I would venture to say that this twofold acceleration has certain connections with the ever-increasing flow of capital in the time of neoliberalism. But examining the responses of the Iranian government reveals a very crucial issue. Pro-government forces lit candles in the memory of George Floyd, while a few months back, lighting a candle for the victims of Ukraine International Airlines Flight 752 was punished with up to five years of imprisonment. The pro-government media covered all the protests after the death of George Floyd, and they underlined the unjust and illegal killing of a citizen—while a few months back, in November 2019, the security forces killed thousands of protesters and even arrested the families who wanted to hold funerals for their loved ones.
\n\nI don’t intend to make oversimplified comparisons, but the international image of the Iranian government is deeply distorted, and the international left and progressive forces are partly responsible for that. The government has created a false anti-imperialist persona for itself, which is uncritically embraced by progressives who oppose the imperialist power of the US. I recall that part of our intellectuals are disappointed with a credible icon such as David Harvey, not because of his theory, but because he participated in an official conference which implicitly confirmed the anti-imperialist stand of the Iranian government. A similar story played out when Angela Davis signed a petition confirming this narrative about the government while people were being butchered on the streets. Of course, Angela Davis was so experienced in the intersections of various oppressions that she soon withdrew her name from the petition. The government’s international legitimacy strongly depends on promoting this false persona, and the progressive forces around the globe usually do not care enough to examine the details, prefering to embrace an easy ally against the imperial power of the US.
\n\nThis persona has a domestic projection, which I mentioned earlier as “the axis of resistance,” a current of workerist orthodox Marxists, who enjoy the freedom of speech and political practice (which is their unalienable basic right, of course, but their being granted it stands in stark contrast to all other leftist and progressive currents here). They are fearless fighters against an abstract conception of neoliberalism and imperialism, while remaining silent about the concrete measures of neoliberal policies inside Iran. Furthermore, they approve and promote the imperialistic interventions of Iran in the surrounding region, on the grounds that this means resisting the bigger imperialist. This complex propaganda machinery has compromised the solidarity our society would otherwise feel for oppressed people around the world. Nationalists take advantage of the situation by promoting slogans such as “Leave Gaza alone, think about our own people”—and the left finds it hard to take a genuine stand among these propaganda machines.
\n\n![](\"https://cdn.crimethinc.com/assets/articles/2020/10/08/7.jpg\")
“We will return to the streets.”
\nFor those of us in the US, America’s imperial presence throughout Latin America is a well-known fact. Iran’s presence in the region, however, gets less attention in the media. In light of General Salami’s recent remarks, defending Iran’s shipment of petrol commodities to Venezuela and celebrating the two countries’ continued alliance, how should we interpret Iran’s presence in Latin America? Would you say that it is part of a larger geopolitical strategy, or does this alliance between Venezuela and Iran come down to the simple fact that both countries have a mutual interest in alleviating the effects caused by US sanctions?
\n\nJ: I don’t have a comprehensive knowledge regarding this matter and I have not done much research on it. However, Iran has a presence in Latin America through its relations with Cuba and Venezuela and also its influence in the Shia community in Brazil and to a lesser extent, in Argentina. The right-wing populism of Ahmadinejad and the left-wing populism of Chavez are wielded together through their anti-Imperialist, anti-American discourse. And now, as you mentioned, both countries are under US sanctions and benefit from an alliance together.
\n\nJ-P: It is misleading to compare America’s presence throughout Latin America with the presence of Iran. But looking at the history of interactions between Latin American countries and their anti-imperialist allies (Cuba and the Soviet Union is an exemplary case), one could not identify a strategic alliance between Latin American populist governments and Iran. There has been no organic growth in the relationship even between Iran and Venezuela, and it is unlikely to occur due to the essential differences between the two parties. On the other hand, reducing the interactions to a set of measures alleviating the effects caused by US sanctions is also wrong. The significance of the international persona of the Iranian government exceeds these measures of mutual interest. Iran can only maintain the class oppression and domestic suppression by relying on the false anti-imperialist persona it presents on the global stage. On the other end, Venezuela, lacking a genuine ally, consents to this image of an international alliance which mainly serves to excuse its domestic problems.
\n\n![](\"https://cdn.crimethinc.com/assets/articles/2020/10/08/8.jpg\")
Graffiti in Tehran, 2020.
\nWhat does the future look like for Iranian leftists within Iran as well as for those living abroad, as political exiles or otherwise?
\n\nJ: I can only answer this question from a more personal perspective. So let me quote Kafka here: “Es gibt unendlich viel Hoffnung, nur nicht für uns.” (“There is an infinite amount of hope, but not for us.”) I think there is no hope for something. Any “something” that has come forth has also conditioned the hope, solidified it into an actuality that ought to be surpassed. I have come to believe that hopelessness in this meaning—affirming the disaster we are living through—may as well be the first step towards a radical politics: there is no space for keeping one’s hands “clean” anymore, there is nothing outside of neoliberal “integrated world capitalism,” to borrow a term from Antonio Negri and Félix Guattari. There is nonetheless hope for a hope: hope for a coming struggle that opens the space for hope.
\n\nJ-P: So far, we have been the No Future generation of Iranian leftists, both in Iran and abroad. For sure, many generations think of themselves as “No Future.” but I am not referring to general tendencies or abstract concepts. When you realize that your immediate history excludes any desirable future, you gradually learn to develop your roots in the present. You are forced to reject any mediatory stage, and only think of the best next step. Paradoxically, you will learn to live as if the future is unwritten; a situation similar to the slogan “Be realistic—demand the impossible.”
\n\nYet the potential of an unwritten future is projected on the present as a struggle for survival; we cannot survive without immediately and radically changing our conditions. That is why we need to develop our own politics of survival, new lines of alliance, new forms of self-organization and collective self-care. It seems boring, and far from the revolutionary self-conception of many Iranian leftists—especially those living abroad. But only then can the Iranian left translate its current potential into a concrete alternative—and its alternative would be widely accepted by the society, while the opposing forces would be incapable of terrorizing it.
\n\n![](\"https://cdn.crimethinc.com/assets/articles/2020/10/08/6.jpg\")
“Strangers everywhere.” A work by Claire Fontaine.
\nWith respect to the term “cultural Marxist,” it is important to note here the differences in connotation and meaning between the ways that the term is used in the United States and how it is used in Iran. While in the United States, the expression evokes the conspiratorial myth of the ascendency of a shadow Judeo-Bolshevism behind liberal democratic governments, seeking to render impure the white, European, race; in Iran, “cultural Marxist” is a pejorative term used to describe radical academics who are more comfortable as “public intellectuals” and invest more time in speaking engagements and the written text than in the practical exigencies of concrete struggles on the ground. ↩
\nIn early October, a wave of protests swept the streets of Ecuador against cuts in gasoline subsidies and, consequently, rising costs of living. This has become the country’s largest popular uprising in decades. Indigenous marches arrived in Quito, the capital, and occupied the Parliament building; thousands of protesters confronted President Lenín Moreno’s police forces, forcing the government to relocate its headquarters to try to escape the insurrection. Moreno is the successor to and former vice president of the leftist Rafael Correa, who rode to power on the momentum of the social movements of the 1990s and ruled the country from 2007 on, implementing the same neoliberal model for pacifying and co-opting social movements applied by other left governments in Latin America like the Workers Party (PT) in Brazil. The convergence of various rural, city, student, women, and indigenous groups has contributed to radicalizing a struggle that is now becoming a popular uprising.
\n\nOn Monday morning, October 14, the Confederation of Indigenous Nationalities of Ecuador announced that the president had backed down and agreed to repeal the decree 883, the austerity bill (known as the paquetazo, package), and replace it with new agreements to be build with indigenous movements. But the Confederation of Indigenous Nationalities of Ecuador (CONAIE) announced that the struggle continues, demanding the departure of the Ministers of Defense and Interior, who were responsible for the violent repression of the protests.
\n\nWe conducted this interview on October 10, directly with comrades on the barricades in the streets of Ecuador, in order to understand the background of the mobilization. An earlier version of this interview appeared in Portuguese via Facção Fictícia.
\n\n![](\"https://cdn.crimethinc.com/assets/articles/2019/10/14/1.jpg\")
Protesters clashing with police in Quito, October 8.
\nThe governments of Brazil and Argentina and institutions associated with the European Union are declaring their support for the government of Lenín Moreno in Ecuador and denouncing the popular revolt of working-class and indigenous people. Obviously, these institutions know that austerity policies are also on their agenda and fear that the same scenario will spread across the Americas and other parts of the globe.
\n\nHow do you see austerity and subsidy-cutting policies affecting daily life in Ecuador? What was it that caused the urban population and indigenous people to say “enough”? Is there an anti-capitalist sentiment on the streets?
\n\nThe resistance that is happening at this moment, which is already eight days old, is already an historic event. It is the biggest uprising in recent years—historically, I don’t know, but it is certainly the biggest strike in recent years, which has as its protagonist the indigenous people, because the uprisings of the past did not last as long as they are now.
\n\nAusterity and the policy of subsidy reductions affect daily life in Ecuador, but I believe there is a class divide in what is happening these days in Quito and throughout the country. Part of the population does not understand the reasons for the protest; they say that in fact the government is not raising the price of gasoline but merely removing an existing subsidy. What they do not understand is that increasing gasoline increases the price of tickets, for example. A 10 cent increase is a lot for a public university student. Food prices have also increased during this period. For small vendors who buy things for their everyday use and earn very little, it affects them a lot. For example, a sack of potatoes that was $18 ten days ago is now $30 to $35 dollars.
\n\nThere has been an immediate spike in gasoline prices. The annual subsidies allowed for greater access to food staples and other types of consumer goods; most of the food—for example, vegetables grown in the Sierra [the Andes] or bananas grown on the Costa plantations—is transported in diesel trucks. Most city buses, too. There is a connection between gas subsides and the prices of basic grocery products. If gas costs rise, all prices will rise—food, transport, power.
\n\nAs I said, there is a class issue: the middle class may not be suffering as a consequence of these measures, but most of the population is already feeling them. Indigenous people know that they will not be able to sell their products—and that when they have to sell them to townspeople, they will earn very little. In the end, this is a chain in which the direct producer is the one who earns the least, and they know it. It’s necessary to understand that here, the food in the big cities arrives from the countryside, so there is a direct effect of the rising price of gasoline on the small producers in the countryside, where most of the indigenous people live.
\n\nRegarding anti-capitalist sentiment on the streets, the left has been very divided since Rafael Correa came to power 12 years ago, establishing a left-wing government that capitalized on the social protests of the 1990s and the first years of the 21st century. Many of the protagonists of the struggles of those times ended up joining the government. During those years, there were people who believed in this government, but later realized that it was following a very capitalist direction. This prevented real unity on the left.
\n\nNow, at this moment in history, I do not believe that there was a growth process by which social movements developed until they reached this moment of explosion. Various things have happened in the social field in recent years, but there was no clear direction towards revolutionary and community organization. It is as if the social movements were asleep, and overnight, thanks to the “paquetazo” [the economic reform “package”],1 everyone suddenly came together, and this caused the struggle to radicalize. For example, there were many blockades in neighborhoods, on the outskirts of cities, in small villages, and this kept the struggle alive for eight days.
\n\n![](\"https://cdn.crimethinc.com/assets/articles/2019/10/14/2.jpg\")
A march of thousands of indigenous people converged on Quito.
\nOn October 8, thousands of indigenous people occupied the Parliament building in Quito. Can you describe for us what happened there?
\n\nIn fact, the Indians arrived on October 7, on Monday, and there was a pitched battle in Quito that lasted five or six hours involving students, social movements, and other residents of Quito who were trying to keep the police busy in order to enable the indigenous comrades to enter. Recall that we are living in a State of Exception, so the military is on the streets and had blocked Quito’s main entrances, the North and South entrances, to prevent indigenous people from other provinces from entering. However, the people were so well-organized that the military did not have enough intelligence at their disposal to stop them. The fact that the fight took place in the city center also opened up gaps that enabled the indigenous people to reach the historic center.
\n\nJust as we pushed the police back, we saw the crowded trucks coming and the bikes that accompanied the indigenous caravan. It was a very exciting moment.
\n\nThey went directly to El Arbolito Park, next to the Salesian University, where logistical support for the movement is organized. The following day, a rally took place at Parque El Arbolito and people agreed to take the Assembly (the parliament building in Quito). When we arrived there, a first delegation entered, then gradually more and more people entered, while there were thousands of people at the door of the Assembly wanting to enter. Police shot tear gas canisters at people, which created a mass panic. People could have been trampled to death because many could not breathe; people ran in various directions. Meanwhile, police continued to fire tear gas canisters and rubber bullets at protesters. At that moment, a very great repression began.
\n\nThe Assembly, strategically speaking, is like a small fort perched on a hill; to protect it, the police positioned themselves at a higher point so that snipers could hit the protesters with tear gas canisters and also live rounds. As a result, the police inflicted a large number of injuries and some deaths, as they were in a strategic position.
\n\nThe idea of going to the Assembly was one of the actions that the indigenous movement had decided to carry out during these days in Quito. Until yesterday [Wednesday, October 9], there was a lot of concern because there was no clear strategy, while the government refused to back down and kept increasing the repression. The fact that police sent tear gas into shelters and peace enclaves such as the Salesian University and the Catholic University caused a great deal of outrage; in a way, this was a blow to the government, because the news circulated despite the news shutdown that the mainstream media and the government have been trying to maintain.
\n\nToday [Thursday, October 10], in the morning, eight police officers were captured by the movement and brought to the large popular and indigenous assembly at the House of Culture, where there were about 10,000 or 15,000 people. The reporters who were there ended up broadcasting the assembly live, even if they didn’t do it in the best way. In a way, this broke the media siege by disclosing, for example, the fact that an indigenous leader of Cotopaxi, Inocencio Tucumbi, had been killed. He had lost consciousness after inhaling a lot of tear gas and was then trampled by a police horse. That had not appeared in the mainstream media. Suddenly, the dead appeared on the big television channels and it became clear to the general public that—yes, the government is killing people and carrying out repression at an extreme level!
\n\n![](\"https://cdn.crimethinc.com/assets/articles/2019/10/14/7.jpg\")
Protesters occupying Ecuador’s National Assembly in Quito on Tuesday, October 8.
\nSo today’s strategy was successful. As I told you, yesterday, there was still no very precise strategy, but today we were more organized. People formed a procession one kilometer long from the House of Culture to the Hospital to transport the body of a comrade. Many people applauded; it was also a moment of great emotion. We said goodbye to him with great honor, because he was a great fighting companion. People also promised at that time that the fight would continue in his memory. It was also a time to regroup, to rest, to consider what strategy to follow in the coming days, and to share this general pain by thinking of those who have fallen, those who are injured, giving us the courage to keep fighting.
\n\nThe demand from the Confederation of Indigenous Nationalities of Ecuador (CONAIE) next was clear, announcing that if the government radicalized the violence, obviously the street would also in response become radicalized.
\n\nWhen night came, the police were released and handed over at the front of the Assembly, in the midst of a large demonstration. Because the Assembly and the House of Culture are near each other, there was a kind of permanent demonstration taking place in front of the Assembly and the area was full of protesters. There were about 30,000 people in the area tonight. When the police were handed over, the indigenous people made it clear that they had been detained for entering an area that had been declared a peace zone. This is why they had been detained, but now they were being released safe and sound. This stands in contrast to police practice, because on the day the Assembly was taken, the police took about 80 prisoners. Almost all of them were released yesterday with marks of violence and injuries.
\n\n![](\"https://cdn.crimethinc.com/assets/articles/2019/10/14/3.jpg\")
Crowds taking over police vehicles in Quito on October 9 during the national strike.
\nIndigenous peoples have declared their own State of Exception in their territories, threatening and arresting state agents who have dared to enter those regions. Can you describe this form of autonomy and territorial organization?
\n\nAbout the State of Exception decreed in the indigenous territories, this also explains the episode I just described. For at this time, the House of Culture and the surrounding regions are being considered indigenous territories, so it was understood that the police violated the exceptional sovereignty of the indigenous peoples and were therefore detained. This also took place in other indigenous territories this week, when military forces who violated these territories were arrested and military buses and armored vehicles were hijacked. Indigenous peoples have long demanded autonomy in their territories and have their own indigenous principles. When a problem occurs within these territories, such as someone stealing or causing trouble, the case is resolved by indigenous justice without going through state justice.
\n\nFrom the moment the Government decreed the State of Exception, in response, the Indians also decreed a State of Exception in their territories as a way to reduce the level of repression and also to pressure the military and police. On the street or in the territories, representatives of the state repress people, so they know they are in danger of being detained. In response, in various territories, military and police officers were detained, disarmed, and released after a few days after having experienced indigenous justice. This functions to make the accused person face the reality of everything he has done, depending on the offense committed, and in relation to this, the punishment to be suffered by the prisoner is decided in a communal way.
\n\nRegarding ethnicities, let’s say CONAIE is divided between all indigenous peoples and other peoples including cholos (mestizos) and black people from the equator. There are the indigenous people of the coast, the people of Serra Norte, Serra Central, Serra do sul, and those from the east, from the Amazon region, and they all come together through the Confederation of Indigenous Nationalities of Ecuador.
\n\n\nhttps://twitter.com/OrlenysOV/status/1183148003571490821\n\n\n
There are rumors from the government media that CONAIE is making deals with the government and it seems that the government is trying to divide the movement between “good protesters” and “bad protesters.” But in the last few hours [of October 10], however, there have been reports that there is no agreement between CONAIE and the government. What chance is there that state cooption will be successful? How willing is CONAIE to radicalize the movement or negotiate? And what influence or effective representation does CONAIE have among indigenous peoples?
\n\nOf course, there have been rumors, gossip, lies, and falsehoods from the government and the media aimed at dividing the popular struggle that is taking place today on the streets of Quito and throughout Ecuador. It must be said that the large organizations such as CONAIE and the FUT (the largest labor union in the country) have historically negotiated in times of weakness, and these negotiations have gone nowhere. And because they are large organizations, they also take place within a super-political scenario—thus, sometimes, the movements themselves see them as ambiguous political structures.
\n\nBut this is normal. Besides, we must see the organizational capacity they have, in this case especially CONAIE, with its historical role, considering that in the past it has managed to overthrow several presidents. In those days, we also saw the power of bus drivers, truck drivers, and taxi drivers that paralyze the city and the power of the students who took to the streets. The truth is that bus drivers and truck drivers have a very self-interested historical role in Ecuador and they decided to get out of the strike as soon as they were able to raise ticket prices, whereas other people, especially students, managed to keep the fight going on the streets and the Indians immediately joined in. Both the urban movement and the indigenous movement soon managed to decentralize the attention that was initially exclusively directed at bus drivers and truck drivers.
\n\nSo yes, there were these rumors. But today [October 10], there is attention focused on the arrests of the police officers and on the journalists who immediately went there. The leaders of each indigenous group and CONAIE’s president, Mr. Vargas, have publicly stated that they will not negotiate with the government because there is no negotiating about the blood of the dead and that the conditions for initiating a dialogue would be the elimination of decree 883 (the “paquetazo”), that the IMF leave the country, and that Interior Minister Maria Paula Romo and Defense Minister Oswaldo Jarrín immediately resign because they are to blame for the deaths. Obviously, there is a lot of pressure from the base in these organizations.
\n\nOver the previous days, there were a few meetings, mainly between leaders and the high command of political organizations. But today [October 10], it was decided to hold a popular assembly that lasted many hours and every decision was the result of consultation with everyone, with the base population that was there. There were about 10-15 thousand people and everything was then decided collectively. We can also say that grassroots pressure is compelling the leadership to make radical decisions as well, not to sell out the movement out of desperation for fear of being arrested or in return for money the government wants to give them under the table.
\n\nCONAIE, in general, has a huge representation. In Ecuador, if you think of indigenous peoples, you think immediately of CONAIE. It is a very large organization with considerable political structure and also communicative, strategic. Today we saw very well how they managed to “turn over the tortilla” and put the government in difficulty.
\n\n![](\"https://cdn.crimethinc.com/assets/articles/2019/10/14/4.jpg\")
Welcome to the Quito Commune: a barricade near the National Assembly building on October 12.
\nThe government accuses former President Rafael Correa of being behind the demonstrations. But it doesn’t appear that the Correistas [supporters of Correa] are playing a leading role. What is Correa’s role in the current phase of activity, both in the marches and in the possibility of “peaceful” or electoral co-optation and exit from the conflict?
\n\nObviously, the government accused Correa, accused Maduro, alleged that Correa had traveled to Venezuela and, from there, developed a plan to destabilize the government. Now they are also saying that the ones behind the street turmoil are Latinquín, which is a “pandilla” (gang) and the FARC [Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia, Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, an insurgent group that fought a civil war against the government for years]. All this shows that government politicians no longer know what to say. Obviously, he’s used to blaming Correa, for two years Correa has been guilty of everything. Although it is true that Correa is a corrupt man who must pay for crimes against humanity, for the repression that took place under his governments, for corruption, it’s senseless to blame him for all that is the responsibility of the current government, which has ruled the country for more than two years. There is a general right-wing custom of supporting Lenín Moreno and blaming Correa every time there is a crisis. If money is lacking, it is because Correa took it; if there are criminals, it is because Correa made laws that liberated criminals; if there are many migrants, it is because of the mobility law. The previous government is always to blame.
\n\nThat said, over the past year, in mobilizations and marches against the government—which were much smaller than they are now, because now it is a real revolt—the Correistas were always present and this created problems for some social movements who didn’t want to be with them. That made us expect that they would still be present in the marches that are taking place now, as they are also a very consistent group. In fact, on the first day they marched and were repressed; on the second day, they also appeared, but stayed behind the march and simply burned two tires outside the Central Bank while students tried to enter the historic center and confront the police. After that day, the Correistas practically disappeared; people gave them no space. Today [October 10], we were doing interviews with some self-organized companions and we asked them, “What about Correa?” And they all answered very clearly: “I’m not a Correista, I’m not here for Correa, Correa doesn’t pay us.” And this is evident: the Correistas are not in the marches. Certainly a few might be there as individuals, but they are not organized.
\n\nTwo days ago, on the day of the assembly, Father Tuárez, the president of the Citizen’s Participation Council who was fired for being a religious fanatic, said that God had told him that Correa was the Savior and that he needed to return. He tried to infiltrate the mobilizations, but people forced him to flee. So in short, this possibility does not exist.
\n\nThis is also interesting: neither political parties nor traditional politicians have been able to appropriate what is happening. The only authorities who propose more “policies” that are seen as possessing legitimacy are the leadership of the FUT and CONAIE unions, which are currently leading the mobilizations. In fact, the power lies in all the people on the streets, and that is very scary to the Right, to the bourgeoisie, to the bankers, to the “owners” of the country, because the street does not accept any of the political leaders.
\n\nSo the solution may be for the “paquetazo” to fall and for the country to return to calm for some time, but obviously this cannot last long. Another possibility is that Lenín Moreno will resign and the “paquetazo” will remain, and the government will try to distract and pacify the people by focusing attention on the fact that Moreno has left or the process of building a “popular” government, a street-born government—such rumors are already circulating. So imagine what the Right is thinking, the Ecuadorian bourgeoisie. They absolutely cannot permit the streets to win, because that would mean that after 12 or 13 years people are shown something that in common perception no longer exists—that is, that going to the streets is good and that if you get organized, if you resist and keep insisting, you will acheive your goal. That would cause a chain reaction that would once again enable people to believe in their own potential.
\n\nThe Right knows this and that is why they are all united to try to prevent it from happening.
\n\n![](\"https://cdn.crimethinc.com/assets/articles/2019/10/14/5.jpg\")
Barricades in Quito on October 13.
\nHow is the ruling bloc responding to the demonstrations? Could divisions open up between parties, in the military, or elsewhere?
\n\nThe bloc that holds power is united. The greatest political leaders (Lenín Moreno, Guillermo Lasso, Jaime Nebot, Álvaro Noboa) are all united. Correa obviously says nothing because what he wants to do is capitalize on what’s happening in the upcoming elections. He is well aware that it is not convenient for him to talk too much, because the government is already saying that it is his fault and it is not strategic for him to get too involved. It is enough for people to think that “everything was better when he was there” and in the next elections he is very likely to win. The president is now in Guayaquil, which is the refuge of the social-Christians, the right-wing party, whom everyone feared would win the next election. But now it does not seem possible because, certainly, he will not have the vote of the Sierra, cities like Quito, Ambato, Riobamba, indigenous communities. So everyone in power is united, trying to use every possible means to criminalize the protest.
\n\nAs for the Armed Forces, we now have a Defense Minister trained in Israel, the Mossad and the School of the Americas, a crazy fascist, a military man. Four days ago, the government imposed a mandatory one-hour government show on radio and television that all companies were compelled to broadcast, in which this madman spoke half the time, threatening that the Armed Forces will be able to defend themselves, that they should not be provoked, that people must remain calm because if they do not, the repression will be fierce, as if we were in a dictatorship. This clearly provoked a lot of outrage. It is not yet known, there is no accurate data, whether there have been desertions within the army or police. What is certain is that the historical role of the army has always been to repress the people, and at a certain moment, when popular discontent is already evident, they try to come up with a strategy to prevent the emergence of a popular government and present themselves as mediators to create a new government, but it usually always ends up being worse than the previous one. Then it is possible that at some point the Armed Forces will begin to create disruption within popular organizations and also to withdraw their support from the president.
\n\n![](\"https://cdn.crimethinc.com/assets/articles/2019/10/14/8.jpg\")
Children and protesters wait for food at a community canteen in Quito.
\nHow did the movement transform everyday life in the city of Quito? And how is the day organized in the spaces occupied by the protesters?
\n\nThe kind of solidarity that has emerged here in the city is amazing; some have renamed it the Quito Commune, because it is not just indigenous people, not just students, not just manifestations. There are blockades in the neighborhoods that are organized. Just as in the Historic Center, the neighborhood of San Juan, for example, is being organized autonomously. When a demonstration arrives, people give you food, water. Yesterday [October 9], when tension shifted to the outskirts of San Juan, in the upper part of the Historic Center, there were several locals arriving bringing stones, people opening the windows of their houses to give the protesters material to burn or to use to protect themselves from tear gas, people opening the doors of their houses to give us water.
\n\nInside houses, people received and helped the injured, providing a space for volunteer doctors to treat them, since ambulances could not get there. There are many volunteer doctors, many of them medical students from the ward, who are helping in the streets, providing emergency assistance to the injured, saving lives. We have an incredible medical apparatus, very organized.
\n\nWe have spaces to receive and redistribute food: I am part of one of these groups on Whatsapp because the place where I work is serving as a collection point. And throughout the city center, through all the universities, there are places that function as popular canteens, as welcoming spaces for outsiders who have come to Quito to fight. These places are full of donations; sometimes they do not even know where to take all the donations they receive. There are communal kitchens where people come to volunteer to prepare food. Yesterday, I was talking to people from a communal kitchen in Parque Arbolito; there was a gentleman there who was injured when police attacked the Park, because despite the attack the kitchen continued to serve people. The kitchen was set up by a neighborhood of Quito, organized through an evangelical church—there was the pastor and his three giant pots. I was told that they had fed 700 people this day alone.
\n\nI also met and spoke with a very humble lady from southern Quito who had a small business. She came in the afternoon in a small van along with her son, passing by the Park to hand out coffee and bread to the people. So really, food is not lacking, there is food everywhere—today I have eaten four times. Everywhere, there are people calling you to eat something; sometimes they take offense if you refuse, because it is a way of donating to the cause.
\n\nThere are people organized to extinguish the tear gas canisters, and to take care of the people affected by the gas. There are all kinds of organizations—there are people who offer childcare. [At this point, the interviewee coughs: “It was bad, it’s the effect of gas on the lungs.”] There are people who organize games for children. There are people who spend the day singing, playing music. It is really very, very interesting what is happening here. This is why some here speak of the Quito Commune, some say that in some ways, in this regard, we have already made gains at the level of spontaneous self-organization.
\n\nBut it took a lot of assemblies to be able to organize what is happening now. I believe this is the biggest victory, and we hope it can continue—this spirit of self-organization. This shows that together we can stand up to the government for eight days and paralyze a country for eight days, to ensure that our rights are respected.
\n\n![](\"https://cdn.crimethinc.com/assets/articles/2019/10/14/6.jpg\")
October 10: these eight police officers were held captive by indigenous people after entering their territory.
\nHow does the movement plan to organize from tomorrow [October 11]?
\n\nToday [October 10], there was a demonstration, with the release of the police who had been arrested, with a call to continue the fight; the indigenous people are still here in Quito. Today was a day of tranquility, peace, mourning. In fact, CONAIE has announced three days of mourning; I don’t know if that means that in the next three days there will be only peaceful marches. But I think strategically it can also serve a little; for example, today was a “peaceful” day, but a lot of things have been achieved, we have gained media attention, the media barrier has been broken—despite the fact that the government cut our cell phone signal and shut down the Internet, which made it difficult to document and communicate about the events via independent media and individual efforts.
\n\nI think we are all preparing for a long resistance. If at first we thought it might end suddenly, after what we have seen in recent days, we understand that it will last much longer—and it is. That is why we have to organize the moments of struggle strategically, not burn them up immediately. It is important to try to shape public opinion, to break the media barrier, to create new combat strategies as well as demonstrations, riots, times of conflict with the police. This is not to say that one thing is right and another is wrong, but that we need to use every possible tool to achieve victory.
\n\nSurely the fight will continue! Today we promised before the coffin of the comrade killed by the police that the fight will go on.
\n\nThis refers to the decree 883 of the government of Lenin Moreno and its economic package, in Spanish the expression is used to give a negative meaning ↩
\n