Blessed is the Flame

An introduction to concentration camp resistance and anarcho-nihilism

Serafinski

2016
Contents
Introduction 6
Anarcho-nihilism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Collision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
The Ceaseless Lager . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

Introduction to concentration camp resistance 12

Absolute Subjugation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Precluding Resistance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
The Conditions for Resistance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

Sabotage and pure negation 20

Sabotage in the Lagers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Pure Negation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Jouissance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

Spontaneous resistance & Time 26

Spontaneous Resistance in the Lagers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Lager-time, Despondency, and Timelessness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
Anarcho-Nihilism, Progressivism, and Futurity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
Messianic Time . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

Organizations and Major Uprisings 35

Overview of Organizations in Lagers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
The Resistance Movement in Auschwitz & The Sonderkommando Uprising . . . . . . 36
Anarcho-Nihilist Critique of Organizations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
The Sobibór Uprising . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
The Treblinka Uprising . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
Anarcho-Nihilism and Informal Organizing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47

Reflections 51
Cruel Optimisms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
Insurrectionary Memories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
The Void . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54

Glossary 55

Afterthoughts 56

Bibliography 57

2
Acknowledgements 60

3
Blessed is the match consumed
in kindling flame.
Blessed is the flame that burns
in the secret fastness of the heart.
Blessed is the heart with strength to stop
its beating for honor’s sake.
Blessed is the match consumed
in kindling flame.

—Hannah Senesh,
Jewish partisan fighter.

And may the flame that

burns inside us
burn everything around us.

—Panayiotis Argyrou,
Proud Member of the Conspiracy of Cells of Fire.

4
Burning Treblinka perimeter during the prisoner uprising, in August 1945. This clandestine
photograph was taken by Franciszck Znbecki.

5
Introduction
We are being led to our slaughter. This has been theorized in a thousand ways, described in
environmental, social, and political terms, it has been prophesied, abstracted, and narrated in
real time, and still we are unsure of what to do with it. The underlying point is that the progress
of society has nothing to offer us and everything to take away. Often it feels like we are giving
it away without a fight: when we sell our time for money, allow our passions to be commodified,
invest ourselves in the betterment of society, or sustain ourselves on the spoils of ecological
destruction, we openly (though not consensually) participate in our own destruction.
The question hangs in an ethereal and ghastly voice: Why do you let yourselves be led to the
slaughter like sheep? As Hermann Langbein addresses in Against All Hope: Resistance in the Nazi
Concentration Camps, the survivors of those most explicit of human slaughter houses have been
plagued by that question for decades, to which some have simply replied: we didn’t.1
What can stories of resistance inside of the Nazi concentration camps teach us about our own
situations? How can we relate to the resistance of those immersed in “the most frightful and
hopeless struggle the world has ever witnessed?”2
Underneath the ubiquitous sheep-to-the-slaughter metaphor is buried a profound historical
possibility: wherever the Nazis sought to impose domination and violence, people resisted. Be-
hind the images of people wearing armbands, boarding trains, and walking placidly into gas
chambers, lies a rich history of recalcitrance’ and insurrection.3 Inside of the Nazi concentration
camps, places meticulously designed to subjugate and exterminate human beings, people orga-
nized, conspired, sabotaged, and reflexively fought back against their oppressors. Though there
are certainly lessons to be taken from World War II about the potential for whole populations
to be rendered docile, there are also lessons about what it means to defy pacification in extraor-
dinarily bleak circumstances. When we forget these kinds of stories, we forget about our own
capacities for resistance. This text is about telling those stories and letting them become part of
our own struggles.
A different approach: We have already been led to our slaughter — it is all around us. The world
in which we exist is a protracted death, a sort of economically-sustained limbo in which hearts
are permitted to beat only to the extent that they can facilitate the upward stream of capital. The
plague of domestication has reached into every wild space, and the lines of colonization have
crossed us more times than we can count.4 Every unproductive aspect of the biosphere has been
flagged for eradication, from the “beam-trawled ocean floors” to the “dynamited reefs” to the
“hollowed-out mountains,”’ the highest calibers of technology are locked into a perpetual killing

1
Langbein 2
2
Garlinski 158. The occasional use of superlatives throughout this text, as well as my exclusive focus on the
Nazi holocaust, is not meant to exceptionalize this particular history above any other experiences of suffering or
genocide. History has tragically given us far too many “frightful and hopeless” struggles to play such petty games.
3
“Recalcitrance”: Resisting authority or control; not obedient or compliant; hard to manage.
4
Dark Mountain 23

6
spree chugging along in a “monotonous rhythm of death.”5 We who still have air in our lungs
are the living dead, and struggle daily to remember what it feels like to be alive, holding tightly
to the “desire for wildness that the misery of a paycheck cannot allay.”6 We roam the desolate
architecture of our slaughter houses (“the prison of civilization we live in”) like ghosts who feel
but cannot quite understand the vapidity of our existence.7 To borrow some apt phrases from
the Conspiracy of Cells of Fire (CCF): we have become thoroughly integrated into “a system that
crushes us on a daily basis”, that “controls our thoughts and our desires through screens” and
“teaches us how to be happy slaves” while letting us “consider ourselves free because we can vote
and consume”, and all the while, “we, like cheerful Sisyphus, are still carrying our slavery stone
and think this is life.”8 As an American Iraq war veteran-turned-strategy consultant wrote in the
New York Times in 2013: “The biggest problem we face is a philosophical one: understanding that
this civilization is already dead.”9 The extent to which we have internalized the rhythms, values,
and stories of this civilization “ties our future to [this] undead and all-devouring system.”10
Then perhaps a better question might be: Why are we continuously being led to our slaughter
like sheep?, to which many of us simply reply: We aren’t.

Anarcho-nihilism
A nihilist is a person who does not bow down to any authority, who does not accept any
principle on faith, however much that principle may be revered. —Ivan Turgenev

The anarcho-nihilist position is essentially that we are fucked.11 That the current manifesta-
tion of human society (civilization, leviathan, industrial society, global capitalism, whatever) is
beyond salvation, and so our response to it should be one of unmitigated hostility. There are no
demands to be made, no utopic visions to be upheld, no political programs to be followed — the
path of resistance is one of pure negation. In short, “that conditions in the social organization
are so bad as to make destruction desirable for its own sake independent of any constructive pro-
gram or possibility.”12 Aragorn! traces the history of nihilism to 19th century Russia, where the
“suffocating” environment of Tsarism created a breeding ground for a purely negative strain of so-
cialism. What started as a philosophical rejection of conventional morality and aesthetics laid the
groundwork for a youth-driven counter-culture of hedonism, communalism, and proto-hipster

5
Goldstein 68. Here Goldstein is describing the endless stream of corpses leaving the Warsaw Ghetto.
6
Zlodey 213
7
A Conversation Between Anarchists 15
8
In Cold Blood 9
9
To Our Friends 29
10
Bæden Vol. II 8
11
I have chosen the phrase anarcho-nihilism to specify the particular collision of anarchist and nihilist thinking.
Some believe that nihilism is a strain of anarchism (Aragorn!), while others have argued that the anti-capitalist po-
sition is inherently nihilist (Uncontrollable), both of which render the phrase “anarcho-nihilist” redundant. Phrases
like “political nihilism”, “strategic nihilism”, “conscious nihilism”, “anarchist nihilism”, “nihilist anarchism”, “active
nihilism” and “black anarchy” all seem to point towards the moment when nihilism emerges from its ennui to take
on the existent. Because I approached nihilism from an anarchist lens, the phrase “anarcho-nihilism” seemed a good
fit, though at points, for ease of reading, I have simply referred to this tendency as “nihilism”
12
Nihilism, Anarchy, and the 21st Century 19

7
fashion.13 This eventually birthed a revolutionary force that sought the absolute destruction of
“state traditions, social order, and classes in Russia”, not as part of a program for social change,
but based on a “deeply-held belief that destruction was worthwhile for its own sake”.14 Though
Russian nihilism was eventually squashed by the state, the ideas spread and have recently seen
a resurgence within anarchist currents.
After two centuries of failed revolutions, nihilism has perhaps become even more disinterested
in conventional socialist programs and radical milieus. It has also been armed with decades of
anarchist and post-structuralist theory that have helped to cultivate its critiques of domination,
meta-narratives, teleological structures, gender, and civilization as a whole. Streams of commu-
niques from anarcho-nihilist groups detailing incendiary actions have been backed by a surge of
publications exploring nihilist approaches to the problem of domination in today’s world, both
of which have led to (occasionally useful) lines of dialogue between nihilists and other anar-
chists. Though some strains of nihilism certainly arrive at a place of paralysis, the strain that
collides with anarchism tends to be one of explosive creativity and relentless action. On the path
of negation, anarcho-nihilism spurns positive programs for social change, challenges dominant
modes of time, and discovers a tactical freedom by disregarding inherited moralities and political
traditions, among other positions.

Collision
We are anarchists not by Bakunin or the CNT, but by our grandmothers. —Julieta
Paredes

I began thinking about this text in Toronto, where my 93 year old grandmother lives on the
seventh floor of a high-rise apartment overlooking Highway 401.15 Standing at the floor-to-
ceiling windows in her kitchen, the horizon is swallowed by twelve lanes of concrete and an
endless river of traffic, equal parts terrifying and hypnotic. How many gruesome stories are
written into this one landscape? The concrete road tells the story of the colonization of Turtle
Island, the commuter traffic tells the story of mass domestication under the rhythms of capitalism,
the billowing smog tells a story of the future that’s almost too frightening to believe. Drinking
tea quietly, my grandmother is clearly unfazed by this ominous procession — it is the world she
now knows and accepts. In a previous chapter of her life she confronted and survived a very
different infrastructure of death: as a young adult, the bunkers, factories, and crematorium of
Auschwitz defined nearly a year of her life. Her experiences of the Nazi holocaust sit close with
me as I look out over this glowing ribbon of death and wrestle with the ideas of nihilism.
To what extent do I remain attached to this society that I despise?
What would it mean to sever those attachments?
If this were Nazi Germany expanding out before me, how would I live my life?

13
“‘Both sexes favoured blue-tinted spectacles and high boots. Other common features were a heavy walking-
stick and a rug flung over the shoulders in cold weather; they called it a plaid, but it was not necessarily a tartan.’
This, coupled with huge beards for men and bobs for women, a voracious appetite for cigarettes, an unwashed dirty
appearance, and rude and outspoken behavior made the New People a sight to behold.” (Nihilism, Anarchy, and the
21st Century 7)
14
Nihilism, Anarchy, and the 21st Century 8, 12
15
Which Wikipedia currently claims to be the busiest and widest stretch of highway in the world!

8
 What if I were in my grandmother’s position in 1943?
What does it mean to resist against such a catastrophically extensive and overwhelming sys-
tem?
This collision of anarcho-nihilism and concentration camp resistance came about primarily as
a coincidence of literary indulgences. At the same time as I pored my way through Bæden, a
queer-nihilist journal (still one of the best nihilist text I’ve encountered), I also stumbled upon
my first memoir of resistance from the Warsaw Ghetto. As so often happens, connections began
to jump off the page, and it seemed ideal to pursue these two subjects simultaneously. Since then,
I have found that they speak poignantly to one another, and when held together seem to create a
stereoscopic depth that has helped me to grapple with the weight of both topics simultaneously.
I’ll admit from the outset that I have low ambitions for this project. My intention is not to
comprehensively explain, reinvent, or critique nihilism or anarchism more generally. Rather, I
want to feel out these ideas and see how far they can take me. Like the authors of the nihilist
journal Attentat, I am interested in finding “tools, not answers, with an emphasis on building.”16
Similarly, I have no aspirations to shed new light on the Nazi holocaust, or offer any startling
new interpretations — despite all of my research, the subject still feels somewhat untouchable:
an end to a conversation rather than a beginning. If nothing else, I would like to unearth some
stories of resistance that do not often get told, and in doing so, to bring the holocaust into the
realm of anarchist thought in a meaningful way so that at least we have something to say about it.
I hope to open the doors to other anarchists who have a personal connection to these histories,
or who share an interest, so that we might incorporate them into our lives in productive ways.
At heart, this book is about tapping into the instinctual rebelliousness that resides underneath
of every organization, affinity group, project, and action that we participate in; that reflexive
spirit of resistance rooted in the basic existential understanding that recalcitrance is simply a
more meaningful and joyous form of existence than docility. Too often our insurrectionary urges
get bogged down in ideological costume, rhetorical mandate, and hobbyist paradigms. We chan-
nel our energies into dubious conduits of prefabricated dogma and inevitably burn out or become
listless at the very mention of Revolution.17 Forms of resistance rooted in social obligations and
lifestyle choices all too often fade into lives of despondency, alienation, boredom, or material
comfort. It speaks to the very nature of our domestication that we only choose resistance so
long as it feels like something we can win.
That’s where nihilism enters the picture. I am interested in the sort of resistance we pursue,
not because we necessarily believe it will produce desired changes or lead us into a brighter
future, but because it is the most meaningful response to this world we can imagine. Because
we simply can’t stomach the idea of being passive in the face of a system this brutal, regardless
of how far we may be from our dreams. Nihilism urges anarchists to embrace our feelings of
cynicism around radical milieus, our feelings of boredom with prescribed methods of resistance,
our feelings of hopelessness in the current landscape of domination, and to engage in forms of
revolt that cultivate immediate joy and moments of liberation.
And that’s where the Nazi holocaust becomes particularly interesting.

16
Attentat 150
17
A word from which anarcho-nihilism has largely severed itself.

9
 Concentration camp resistance challenges nihilism to consider just how bleak it is willing to
get. The resistance of those in the Lagers18 who were deprived of every vestige of hope, every
morsel of inspiration, and every shred of comfort, poses rich questions about how much hope-
lessness we are willing to wade through for a chance to fight back. It reminds us that resistance is
not just about getting results, but about our reflexive reactions to oppressive situations. Whether
we succeed in overthrowing our oppressors and bringing about a brighter future can only be sec-
ondary to the visceral need to rebel against the shitty conditions of our lives.
Both topics — anarcho-nihilism and concentration camp resistance — challenge anarchists to
realize a spirit of resistance that can endure horrific conditions, that can weather the storms of
absolute futility, and that can still muster an exuberant desire to rebel.

The Ceaseless Lager

“The Holocaust experience is a very condensed version of most of what life is all about.”
—Dori Laub

This is not a book about happy endings. Almost every story ends with mass torture, slaugh-
ter, and enslavement. When the liberation of the camps occurred it was not because internal
resistance had brought the Nazis to their knees, but because of the arrival of a different team of
imperial state armies.19 A typical leftist approach to this topic might try to emphasize the effec-
tiveness of concentration camp resistance, to paint portraits of heroes who hastened the end of
the war, or to only celebrate the moments of successful escape. A nihilist approach might be just
as content to emphasize all of the times that action accomplished nothing, all of the times that
rebel strategies failed, all of the acts of resistance that did not even survive for us to hear about
them — to stand back with all of that information and to still be able to say: that’s great! From a
nihilistic approach, we can celebrate the “failures” of resistance, because in them we find a sort
of resiliency and substance that may serve us better in our current situations than mere stories
of triumph.
Though it would be ludicrous to over-pronounce a comparison between our situations today
and the concentration camps of World War II, the institutionalized brutality and the systematic
disempowerment many of us feel certainly resonates. Many of us who experience or at least
recognize the horrors of modern society can relate to those before us who were “turned into
numbers, deprived of the last vestiges of human dignity, and transformed into totally submissive
objects”.20 Most of us alive today experience nothing near the brutality of Treblinka; however the
mechanisms that were used to subjugate Häftlinge,21 the prisons that were used to contain them,
and the underlying logic of Nazi Germany that made the camps possible all persist in abundance.
Those who have survived the (ongoing) five hundred year colonization of Turtle Island will surely
recognize many of these as the same methods used to displace and eradicate their people, and
that continue to serve colonial states at their expense. The colonization of this land was, after all,
of great personal inspiration to Hitler himself.22
18
“Lagers”: Nazi concentration camps.
19
See Wayne Price’s The Meaning of World War II for a useful anarchist interpretation of World War II.
20
Langbein 2
21
“Häftlinge”: German for “prisoners”, referring throughout this text specifically to concentration camp inmates.
22
Churchill 308

10
 For a variety of reasons history has exceptionalized this particular genocide, but I’ve come
to understand it as part of an unbroken continuum of domination that neither began nor ended
with Hitler. It’s important to remember that the Nazis didn’t have to build all of their own camps
(some of that work was done by the Social Democratic governments prior), nor did they have
to decommission all of them after the war (the Soviets put a couple of them to good use).23
Let’s also remember that the post-war trials of Nazi doctors were conducted under the explicit
understanding that most governments of the world are guilty of perverse, unconsensual human
experimentation. Most notably, the United States, from where many of the Nuremberg judges
came, had been involved in this kind of brutal scientific experimentation throughout much of
the 20th century, infecting prisoners with malaria plasmodia, infecting death row prisoners with
pellagra, or testing the effects of nuclear radiation on general populations.24 The Nazis were only
found (or remembered as) guilty because they lost the war. Their camps were not fundamentally
unique, though they certainly brought a devastating industrial flair to the whole concept. Giorgio
Agamben has aptly argued that the concentration camp is the defining feature of modern politics,
as it represents a “site of exception” from the enlightened facade of civilized society.25 Indeed,
everywhere we look today we see Nazi machinations at work, though these parallels are often
too controversial to utter. And yet for those willing to see it, from the Gaza strip to the Toronto
Immigration Holding Centre, from the factory farms to the Alberta Tar Sands, the logic of this
civilization continues to show its true colors. In order for some to live safely, others must be
declared Ballastexistenzen26 and be shackled, violated, and killed. In order for humans to thrive,
the earth and all of its other inhabitants must be subjugated and ravaged. Although the uniforms
have changed and the tactics have evolved, the same basic struggle against domination continues.
The phrase “never again”, repeated often by victims and descendants of the Nazi holocaust, rings
more and more hollow with every passing moment.27

23
Agamben 167
24
Agamben 157–159
25
Homo Sacer: Sovereign Power and Bare Life
26
Hitler’s preferred term for the “undesirable and unnecessary” members of society.
27
Huge respect to those holocaust survivors who have transformed their experiences into solidarity with other
oppressed peoples, particularly with Palestinians. Reuven Moskovitz, who broke the Gaza blockade, said: “It is a
sacred duty for me as a survivor to protest against the persecution, the oppression, and the imprisonment of so many
people in Gaza, including more than 800,000 children…I as a Holocaust survivor cannot live with the fact that the
State of Israel is imprisoning an entire people behind fences.”

11
Introduction to concentration camp
resistance
Nobody knows themselves. Sometimes when somebody is really nice to me I find myself
thinking, “How will he be in Sobibór?” —Toivi Blatt

Absolute Subjugation
To provide a quick overview of the Nazi concentration camps is an overwhelming challenge, and
so I will limit my scope here to the topic at hand: resistance, and specifically the conditions for
its emergence. This approach is important for understanding the context in which resistance
happened, but also for understanding the context in which so much resistance didn’t happen.
As mentioned earlier, debates around passivity and “sheep-like” obedience have dominated dis-
cussions of the Nazi holocaust. An essay on resistance within the camps risks playing into a
narrative that once again casts shame or criticism on those who did not fight back, a narrative
I refuse to indulge.1 Of those who were able to survive abduction, transport, and arrival in the
camps, a deftly-designed universe of extreme demoralization, physical duress, and social alien-
ation awaited them. The camps were “designed to break the will of the inmate”,2 to “shatter
the adversaries’ capacity to resist”,3 and as one survivor of Auschwitz wrote: “it would have
been impossible to create worse conditions for resistance, a more perverse and brutal system.”4
The camps were so ordered against resistance that merely to lift one’s hand in defense of an in-
coming blow was considered a grievous act of defiance, worthy of torturous execution.5 Nazi
methodology was deftly crafted to reduce humans to sheep-like creatures, an experiment most
explicitly pursued in their laboratories where scientists busied themselves with the task of phys-
ically rendering Jews into a race of sterile, “animal-like creatures who would be adapted solely
for work”.6 Though these experiments largely failed (with grisly results), the broader experiment
in the camps of creating the conditions for absolute subjugation was disturbingly successful.
So successful were these techniques that even in the most aggravating circumstances imagin-
able, people often found themselves totally incapable of resistance. The totality of this subjuga-
tion is conveyed in the crushing testimonies of those who experienced it: Auschwitz survivor
Elie Wiesel listened to his own father cry out for him while being beaten to death, yet was un-

1
I hold fast to Adelaide Hautval’s caution: “I don’t think anybody in the world today has the right to judgment
or decision as to what he himself would have done in those completely improbable conditions with which one stood
face to face in places like Auschwitz.”
2
Ress 6
3
Jan van Pelt 564
4
Garlinski 38
5
Laska 212; Langbein 52
6
Garlinksi 132

12
able to muster a response.7 Filip Müller painfully watched as 4,000 Auschwitz inmates knowingly
walked into the gas chambers despite the prolonged efforts of some to agitate them into resis-
tance.8 Tadeusz Borowski recalls working alongside 10,000 workers when a truck full of naked
women slowly rolled by calling out for help: “‘Save us! We are going to the gas chambers! Save
us!’… Not one of us made a move, not one of us lifted a hand.”9 These testimonies are powerful
gestures towards the depravity of the “concentration universe” and the extent to which it vio-
lently precluded the potential for defiance. These are not stories of individual passivity — they
are stories of systematic disempowerment.

Precluding Resistance
Perhaps more than anything else, the physical conditions of the Lagers played a role in the sup-
pression of defiance. An explication of this sort could be long and brutal, but suffice it to say that
being kept forever on the brink of starvation, worked beyond the capacities of the human body,
exposed daily to wanton acts of cruelty, subjected to year-round elemental onslaught, and be-
ing perpetually enveloped in pestilence and disease, has the capacity to turn human bodies into
emaciated shells devoid of will power or physical strength. Throughout survivor testimonies,
starvation is the most frequently cited obstacle to resistance. One survivor of the Warsaw ghetto,
Marek Edelman, annoyed with perpetual questions about the passivity of those who boarded
trains bound for death camps, explained to his interviewer: “Listen… do you have any idea what
bread meant at the time in the Ghetto? Because if you don’t, you will never understand how
thousands of people could voluntarily come for the bread and go on to the camp at Treblinka.
Nobody has understood thus far.”10 Vera Laska, a survivor of Auschwitz and editor of Women in
the Resistance and in the Holocaust, reflects on the significance of bread in the camps:

I have seen with my own eyes in Auschwitz an SS man enter the barracks of 1,450
women, throw chunks of bread into their midst and then step back in a fit of laugh-
ter as hundreds of women pushed and shoved, clawed and fought for the crumbs.
Within minutes, three women were trampled to death and dozens injured.11

Though we may recoil learning about situations like this, most of us will never really know
what it feels like to be so systematically deprived of food; thus our exploration of this topic must
always be guided by the deepest humility for the hunger that we can read about but never truly
know.
Another central aspect of the camps that devastated potential for resistance was the Nazi strat-
egy of cultivating social alienation, intended “to reduce all inmates to monads.”12 By creating
conditions that demanded brute self-interest, where groups and individuals were pitted against
each other for scraps of privilege, where the pain of isolation was preferable to the weight of
empathy, the Nazis were able to preclude the capacity for solidarity, and thus the capacity for
7
Wiesel III
8
Jan van Pelt 583–5
9
Jan van Pelt 566
10
Edelman 21
11
Laska 186
12
Jan van Pelt 567. “Monad”: a single-celled organism, a totally separated entity.

13
much resistance. One of the primary tools in this endeavor was a deeply divisive social struc-
ture that pitted inmates against each other. Upon entry into the camps, inmates were put into
an identity category demarcated by a colored triangle (“winkel”), that would henceforth impact
every moment of their existence. Criminal prisoners (mainly Germans) wore green winkels, po-
litical prisoners (e.g. communists, anarchists, etc.) wore red, Jehovah’s Witnesses wore violet,
male homosexuals wore pink, “anti-socials” (e.g. Romas, mentally ill, lesbians, etc.) wore black,
and Jews wore the dreaded yellow star.13 These triangles were sometimes elaborated by marked
letters indicating a person’s country of origin, which also had deep implications for how one
would be treated in the camp. The arbitrary organization of these identity categories into a vi-
olently enforced hierarchy defined social life in the Lagers, and served to undermine solidarity
between inmates. Hannah Arendt observed that in the camps, “the gruesome and grotesque part
of it was that the inmates identified themselves with these categories, as though they represented
a last authentic remnant of their juridical person.”14 Because these identity categories came to
be so internalized and cherished by the inmates, connections between inmates were inherently
governed by Nazi strategy.
The differential treatment of these artificial groupings created deep fissures between prison-
ers. “Greens” were often tasked with running the camps as Senior Inmates (responsible for the
operation of a particular section of the camp) and Capos (heads of labour crews).15 Because an or-
dinary prisoner was “completely at the mercy of his Capo and senior block inmate”, the character
traits of these functionaries often determined one’s chances for both survival and resistance.16
Beneath these in the hierarchy were other “prominent” positions that offered opportunities for
non-lethal labor, extra food rations, or other privileges. Competition for prominent positions
was fierce (literally life or death), and such assignments could only be kept by appeasing the SS
officers who appointed them. Those who attained prominent positions held them tenaciously,
which under the gaze of Nazi officers tended to evoke a certain level of sadism. Overall, the
internal hierarchy of the camp fostered an atmosphere of brutal mistrust, competition, and re-
sentment. New-comers were usually met with outright hostility by fellow inmates, alongside
the physical and verbal abuse of the guards.17 Primo Levi describes how debilitating his first en-
counter with this atmosphere of prisoner hostility was: “This brusque revelation, which became
manifest from the very first hours of imprisonment… was so harsh as to cause the immediate
collapse of one’s capacity to resist.”18
While some echelons of this social hierarchy had hopes of survival and/or upward mobility,
others had none. Across the entire system of camps it was universally true that Jews held the
lowest rung. For them there were generally no prominent positions available or privileges to be
earned; for them there was only death and the hostility and resentment of those around them for
the space they occupied, the food they consumed, and the hopelessness they represented.19 As
Joseph Garlinski describes the Jews’ situation in Auschwitz, their horrid and short lives within

13
Garlinski 33
14
Jan van Pelt 563
15
Langbein 25
16
Langbein 26
17
Survival in Auschwitz 39
18
The Drowned and The Saved 38
19
Though in the later years of the war the sheer volume of inmates and the heightened demand for workers
resulted in some Jews attaining prominent positions.

14
the camps combined with their multilingual, multinational makeup as a group, “limited any pos-
sibility of clandestine work among [them] and decreased the chances of their forming a strong
underground group in the camp.”20 Russians generally occupied the second lowest rung of the
camp, and in situations where they weren’t immediately killed, were rarely able to gain promi-
nent positions or form lasting networks.21 Men marked with a pink triangle were often the
subject of sexual violence, and thus occupied their own unique and vicious echelon of the camp
hierarchy — to even speak with a “pink” was a risky affair, which meant they faced an added
layer of isolation.22 Thus we can begin to see that enormous disparity existed in the privilege of
different inmates, and had substantial implications for the capacity and willingness of different
prisoners to resist.
These assaults on the body and mind were combined with a relentless war on the spirit; de-
moralization was a daily responsibility of the Capos and the SS, who used humiliation, misinfor-
mation, and extreme isolation to obliterate any sense of agency. The Nazis intentionally crafted
a universe that was severed from the rest of the world and that was deeply shrouded in the myth
of the Thousand-Year Reich. To even speak about the war in some camps was a grievous crime,
and so Nazi propaganda about the “blitzkrieg” (lightning-fast war) reigned supreme.23 Inmates
had no reliable reason to believe that anyone knew where they were, that anyone was coming
to help, or that anyone would ever find out what had happened to them in these terrible places.
(We should always remember the Nazis in fact came astonishingly close to covering up many
aspects of their extermination project, and it is only because of the committed work of rebellious
inmates that the world learned details of what transpired in the camps.24 Organizers quickly
learned that “people are more likely to transcend themselves if they know that the public will be
informed of their actions”, and as a result, establishing lines of communication with the outside
world was often a central priority.25
Lastly, daily life within the camps was intended to overwhelm and disempower the inmates
with cruel, often bizarre and inscrutable laws and practices. Primo Levi informs us that the rules
governing life in the camps were “infinite and senseless,” in addition to the guidelines around
work, which were themselves “a Gordian knot of laws, taboos, and problems.”26 These irrational
elements of Nazi control created an environment in which, as one German guard explained to
Levi: “hier ist kein warum” — there is no why here.27 This was a universe in which the SS would
often provide costly health care to one of their torture victims only to send them to the gas
chambers upon recovery, and in which workers would be ordered to carry bricks up stairs in
an assembly line and then jump out of a window to gather more bricks (whoever broke bones

20
Garlinski 171
21
Langbein 159
22
Meers 13; Müller 178. Müller makes reference to the piepels, or Bum-boys, who “served the pleasures” of those
above them.
23
Langbein 81
24
Rashke 2; Garlinski 219
25
Langbein 53. Hannah Arendt applied this concept to totalitarian states in general: “Totalitarian domination
as a form of government… bases itself on loneliness, on the experience of not belonging to the world at all, which is
among the most radical and desperate experiences of man,” (Jan van Pelt 560).
26
Survival in Auschwitz 33–4
27
Survival in Auschwitz 29. This interaction occurred when Levi, parched and starving, reached his hand out of
a transport train to grab an icicle that might assuage his thirst. A guard ran over to knock the icicle out of his hand
for no explicable reason.

15
would be hospitalized, healed, and then sent to the gas chambers).28 This was a universe in which
the number of buttons on one’s jacket must always be five, beds (made mostly of wood and lice)
had to be perfectly made every morning, and in which one’s capacity to choose an appropriately
fitting wooden shoe at an “eye’s glance” might determine chances for another day of survival.29
The innumerable strange and contradictory aspects of camp life reinforced the absoluteness of
Nazi control, and further obliterated the agency and morale of the inmates.

The Conditions for Resistance

From all lairs of meanness and insidiousness the depraved vermin comes crawling and
cozies up to the SS, blissfully betraying their acquaintances and friends, opponents, and
human dignity itself. The golden age of unprincipled persons has dawned. —Pierre
Gregoire (who fell victim to an informant in Sachsenhausen).

For those few individuals who were able (and lucky enough) to survive these conditions and
maintain both the will and physical capacity to resist, an entirely new world of complications and
obstacles awaited. One of the most debilitating mechanisms employed by the SS to discourage
resistance was a policy of “collective responsibility,” whereby any act of revolt, sabotage, or es-
cape was met with brutal punishment, not only for those involved, but for an arbitrary selection
of other inmates. Witold Pilecki, who established the first resistance organization in Auschwitz,
learned this system of collective responsibility harshly upon his entry into the camp: Before
entering the front gates, a prisoner was chosen at random and told to run to a post at the side
of the road — “Ten men were then dragged out of the ranks at random and shot with pistols as
‘collective responsibility’ for the ‘escape,’ which the SS themselves has staged.”30 This lesson was
further reinforced when, a month after Pilecki arrived at the camp, one prisoner was absent from
a morning roll call, which sparked an SS commander to order a “penal stand-at-attention” for the
entire camp that lasted eighteen hours on a bitterly cold, sleeting day, and involved relentless
beatings from the SS.31 This punishment killed approximately two hundred inmates, and several
hundred more were hospitalized.32 Standard policy in Aushwitz would later become that for ev-
ery escapee, ten prisoners would be locked in dark cells without food or water until they died or
the escapee returned.33 Sometimes the fugitive’s family would be arrested and brought into the
camp. These policies deeply complicated any acts of resistance for obvious ethical reasons, and
resulted in some resistance groups implementing a ‘no-escape’ policy to prevent such outlandish

28
Survival in Auschwitz 56
29
Survival in Auschwitz 34
30
Pilecki 14
31
Pilecki 66. The missing prisoner was Tadeusz Wiejowski, who had escaped from the then-primitive walls of
Auschwitz, but was rearrested the following year and shot.
32
One of the prisoner doctors, who provided treatment to the relentless barrows of inmates that day, recalls how
terrible it was to “see these men, comatose, half-conscious, crawling, reeling like drunks, babbling incoherently and
with difficulty, covered with spittle and foaming at the mouth, dying, gasping out their last breath” (Garlinski 25).
33
Langbein 89

16
retributions.34 Outside of Auschwitz, partisan fighters enacted a ‘no-shoot’ policy in the vicinity
of the camp for the same reasons.35
Another impediment that awaited would-be resisters was the Nazi’s prized networks of infor-
mants. The Political Department of the SS maintained elaborate webs of snitches (called “Special
Commissions”) throughout each camp, which were all too easy to establish within the internally
hostile and competitive social fabric. Starving, isolated, and petrified inmates were often faced
with a choice between cooperation or torturous execution. Garlinski explains:

In such a brutal struggle for life, with no quarter given, where for many any trick
was legitimate if it were to one’s own advantage, the average level of honesty and
comradeship was bound to be low. The informers were recruited from various na-
tionalities; they were on every Block, almost in every Kommando.36

Other inmates became snitches of their own initiative in hopes of currying favour or privilege.
These networks of informants were tasked not only with weeding out members of resistance
organizations, but also with aggravating existing tensions between groups, or with agitating ex-
isting ideological differences within groups.37 The SS even went as far as to set up a “snitch-box”
in the middle of Auschwitz where inmates could anonymously rat each other out.38 This intense
concentration of informants in the camps, combined with the policy of collective responsibility,
crushed some resistance activities and dissuaded others from even trying.
And still…
In spite of these and a host of other factors that destroyed almost any possibility of resistance,
we are nevertheless faced with a rich history of sabotage, insurrection, mutual aid, escape, spon-
taneous defiance, and underground organization within the camps. Inmates overcame social
isolation to form deep bonds and endured unfathomable material conditions to bear witness to
what they had seen. They rebelled despite the brutal repercussions and orchestrated escapes
against all odds. Resistance organizations even managed to mitigate the impacts of the Special
Commissions by developing security cultures that were nearly impenetrable. They functioned in
such secrecy that “even in camps where a resistance organization was active for years, the over-
whelming majority of prisoners knew nothing about it.”39 Informants were frequently killed by
rebels, through mock trials in hidden rooms, swift force, or covert assassination. In one case, cas-
tor oil was put into an informant’s soup, and when admitted to the hospital he was given a lethal
injection by a doctor who was part of the resistance.40 In another case, an informant’s x-ray
plates were secretly switched with those of a tuberculosis patient, which meant that he was soon
given lethal injection by the SS themselves.41 The best-known Gestapo informer in Auschwitz
34
Garlinski 68; Langbein 89. In December 1942, due to the overwhelming need for workers, the policy of collec-
tive responsibility was eased and resistance groups began to organize escapes (Garlinski 141).
35
Partisan fighters were bands of anti-Nazi militants who fought from behind enemy lines and occasionally
conspired with concentration camp resistance organizations. Often those who escaped from the camps joined the
partisans.
36
Garlinski 132
37
Langbein 215.
38
Garlinski 133
39
Langbein 56
40
Garlinski 135
41
Garlinski 135. When word of this tactic caught on, the Political Department instituted a new policy that all
lethal injections be cleared with them, so as to prevent assassination of their precious informants.

17
was given a sweater containing typhus-infected lice that killed him within weeks.42 Sometimes
the organizations were able to use social manipulation to have the informant stripped of their
privileges and removed from the special commissions.43 In Auschwitz, resisters quickly gained
access to the snitch-box by making an imprint of the key on a loaf of bread and forging a replica,
allowing them to manipulate what information the SS had access to and to uncover informants
in their midst.44 And, despite the most brutal torture methods employed by the SS, members of
the resistance seem to have rarely snitched on each other after being caught: phrases such as
“however, he gave no one away,” and “the interrogation proved fruitless” are repeated frequently
throughout the literature.45
Rather than dwell on the question of passivity during the holocaust, I am inclined to celebrate
the fact that any resistance happened at all! Alongside the deeply misanthropic and depressing
insights we might gleam from the camps, there is also a great deal for us to cherish. For all of
us who have witnessed our own resistance networks stifled by state surveillance, interpersonal
conflict, hopelessness, and the material strain of keeping food on the table, the Lagers provide
proof that even in the most overwhelming situations people can still find creative and sustained
ways to fight back. Just as Häftlinge were marked with badges to create artificial echelons within
the camps, we too carry badges of imposed social division in such forms as gender, race, and class
that function to keep us squabbling over scraps of privilege. That people were able to overcome
those violently-imposed divisions and move beyond struggles for better representation within
the camp hierarchy should speak volumes to our own lives. And just as organizers in the camps
were able to defy the Special Commissions and develop tight security cultures to keep themselves
safe, so too can we find ways to combat the unending policies of infiltration and COINTELPRO-
style neutralization tactics that we are up against.
While much could be said on specific definitions of resistance, in the realm of concentration
camps, I tend to agree with the broadest definitions offered: “Everything could be treated as
resistance because everything was prohibited. Any activity which created the impression that
the prisoner had retained some of his former personality and individuality was an act of resis-
tance.”46 Activities such as mutual aid, individual escape, charity, friendship, medical aid, cultural
contributions (religious gatherings, education, sports, music, etc.), refusal of work, saving lives,
and communication with the outside world all represent invaluable acts of resistance in a situa-
tion that fostered selfishness and subjugation. Rochelle Saidel, in her book The Jewish Women of
Ravensbrück Concentration Camp, spends five pages discussing the importance of sharing recipes
as a clandestine activity, and another three pages discussing the importance of poetry and song
— forms of resistance that allowed inmates to persevere through unimaginable trauma. More
than anything, to survive and to bear witness to the camps was perhaps the most significant act
of resistance against a system that worked so fiendishly to cover its own tracks. Nevertheless,
this text focuses on those acts that were geared towards the negation of the camps, rather than

42
Garlinski 135
43
Langbein 216. In Sachsenhausen, for instance, one particularly insidious informant named Kuhnke was tacti-
cally disempowered by the resistance group, who were able to exploit disagreements among the SS in such a way that
Kuhnke was removed from his position and beaten severely, ending the terrible period of the special commission in
that camp.
44
Garlinski 133
45
Wasowicz 98; Garlinski 240
46
Wasowicz 52

18
the innumerable efforts that allowed people, in one way or another, to survive them. In keeping
with the anarcho-nihilist tendency, this essay is about those who attacked. In each of the fol-
lowing sections, one form of concentration camp resistance will be paired with an exploration
of anarcho-nihilist ideas: Acts of sabotage are paired with an introduction to nihilism and the
concepts of negation and jouissance; spontaneous acts of resistance are paired with a discussion
of time; and mass uprisings are paired with a critique of anarchist organizing. These pairings are
meant to complement, though certainly not define, each other. I approached them as juxtaposi-
tions more than dialogues, though where relevant I have made space for cross-chatter between
the two subjects. Once again, this project is intended as an introduction to two topics that I feel
resonate very strongly, and is less focused on explicating those connections. In that spirit, my
own analysis has largely taken a back seat to the task of untangling and organizing a wide range
of materials on two difficult subjects. It is my hope that within each act of concentration camp
resistance, we can find a simmering spirit of anarcho-nihilism and an opportunity to deepen our
understanding of what it might mean for us to resist despite overwhelming feelings of futility.

19
Sabotage and pure negation
Sabotage is like wine! —Slogan among Polish women in Ravensbrück

Of all the methods of resistance employed by inmates of concentration camps throughout

World War II, my favourite to read about are the relentless acts of sabotage that plagued Hitler’s
war efforts. While much of the work assigned to inmates early in the war was intended solely
as punishment (e.g. moving bags of sand back and forth), after the spring of 1942, the camps
became a prime source of slave labour for nearby factories that supplied Germany’s army.1 De-
scriptions of the work that occurred within these factories paints a picture of an international
circus of neglect, ineptitude, laziness, and outright stupidity — masks for what were in fact out-
rageously brave acts of sabotage against the Nazi war machine. Using a wide array of creative
approaches, some more blunt than others, the inmates were able to botch their jobs, demonstrat-
ing to the Germans that slavery is simply not a reliable source of quality labor. Many of these
acts were spontaneous, while others were part of organized campaigns; all were geared towards
the pure negation of Nazism. Although sabotage certainly caused headaches for the Nazis and
may have even hastened the end of the war, for Häftlinge whose lives were dominated by a
second-to-second battle for survival, these acts brought only a heightened level of danger and
little personal hope of survival. It is not the outcome of the act, but the moment of action itself
that speaks loudest here. For many, the opportunity to step outside of the role of victim for even
a fleeting moment, the chance to hit back in whatever way possible, outweighed the risks of such
actions. After providing a broad overview of some of the sabotage that took place, this book will
take ITS first detailed look at anarcho-nihilism. The nihilist concepts of negation and jouissance
resonate deeply with these acts of sabotage, offering a framework through which we might think
about acts of resistance not as a means of liberation, but as acts of liberation in themselves. Like
any act of resistance, sabotage within the camps and factories was an incredibly risky venture.
The SS pursued a number of strategies to prevent and dissuade anything that would get in the
way of seamless production and orderly labour lines. The crudest strategy was of course blunt
violence: anyone who even raised suspicions of sabotage was met with swift and brutal reper-
cussions. In some situations, saboteurs “pretended to be slow on the uptake” and were spared
their lives, though even well-feigned stupidity usually resulted in being beaten almost to death
or being hung outside of the factory.2 On the other end of the spectrum, the Nazis experimented
with “premiums,” petty benefits offered to inmates who showed high productivity.3 To aid in
these anti-saboteur efforts, the Political Department developed intense networks of informants
throughout the factories to expose and dissuade saboteurs, turning the factories into “a jungle of
stool pigeons and agent provocateurs” that led to countless executions.4 When these tactics failed
1
Wasowicz 243
2
Langbein 307
3
Langbein 303. At least two camps, Dora and Ravensbrück, saw mass refusals of these premiums from inmates.
4
Langbein 315

20
to produce the desired results, Hitler himself implemented a desperate measure that replicated
the tactics of “shared responsibility” against his own valuable workforce: wherever production
lines lagged to a suspicious degree, and wherever defective products were found in suspicious
quantities, every tenth prisoner in that factory would be shot.5 Despite these bloody efforts,
there were “reports from practically all camps about acts of sabotage by inmates forced to work
on the production of weapons, and it is certain that many acts went unrecorded.”6 Fliers spread
throughout occupied Europe with the phrase “Work Slow” tagged across an image of a turtle,
while slogans were developed within camps to further spread this mentality, such as Buchen-
wald’s, “Whoever works more slowly will reach peace more quickly,” or Sachsenhausen’s less
catchy, “Work slowly, produce substandard articles, waste materials, cause machines to break
down.”7 In short, sabotage became an ingrained part of the work ethic of concentration camps.

Sabotage in the Lagers

To begin, some acts of sabotage were targeted directly at the modes of production within the Nazi
war economy: steel plates used for constructing tanks were “mysteriously” buried under rubble,
key materials were “misplaced,” tools and bricks were “accidentally” damaged, and perfectly good
airplane motors were deemed damaged and sent to the junk yard.8 Entire stockpiles of ammuni-
tion were dumped into lakes, shipments of fuel were poured out onto the ground, and salt was
added to gunpowder by the women of Ravensbrück, rendering it useless.9 In Flöha, French en-
gineers constructed excessively-heavy airplane wings that would pass inspection but certainly
cause problems in the air.10 In Auschwitz, women sabotaged the production of plant-based rub-
ber by simply burning half of the harvested seeds.11 Ships coming out of the Jastram engine
factory were improperly welded, grenades coming out of a factory near Auschwitz failed to ex-
plode, and machine guns produced by inmates of Mauthausen were completely dysfunctional.12
Rockets produced in Dora had inexplicable quantities of urine in the electronic components, cour-
tesy of the Russian inmates.13 In 1943, a Polish inmate named Jan Szot was able to sabotage large
quantities of anti-aircraft missiles by shifting the precise alignment of the detonators ever so
slightly, resulting in two month’s worth of faulty weapons.14
The website degob.org documents testimonials from Hungarians who survived the Nazi holo-
caust, and includes the otherwise-unpublished stories of at least a dozen survivors who engaged
in sabotage while in the camps. Mária Jakobovics recalls her crew’s habitual sabotage of the
production of oil-bombs: “We sabotaged whenever we could by simply not inserting the fuses
into the bombs. When they realized it we of course got twenty five blows with a club, but we
would still do it nonetheless.”15 One woman who was put to work in Auschwitz fixing the piles
5
Langebein 316
6
Langbein 304
7
Wasowicz 245; Langbein 307
8
Langbein 304–5
9
Wasowics 247, 250
10
Langbein 305
11
Wasowicz 246
12
Langbein 306–308
13
Langbein 312
14
Wasowicz 246
15
DEGOB: Protocol 588

21
of clothes taken from incoming Jews reports: “We sabotaged work in a way that we made clothes
unusable on purpose.”16 A woman at Bolzenburg who was put to work in an airplane factory
reports: “We sabotaged work in whatever ways we could. We broke the drills, presses, and
everything that could appear to have happened by accident.”17
Because some inmates were put to work as bureaucrats, a great deal of sabotage could be
accomplished from behind a desk with nothing more than the stroke of a pen. With this method
unskilled workers were deemed experts and sent to do important work on the factory line, while
those with valuable skills were sent to dig trenches.18 On the other hand, skilled workers who
could be trusted to do sabotage work were handpicked for specific jobs in which they could cause
maximum damage.19 A third tactic involved fudging roll-call numbers such that some inmates
were simply overlooked by the SS and spared from work for days at a time.20 In at least one
situation, a doctor falsely diagnosed an entire work crew with typhus in order to have them all
put on quarantine and delay the delivery of an urgent order of weapons.21
Organized sabotage efforts often united people of different nationalities and political ideolo-
gies towards a common goal. In one case, two dozen inmates who established a Polish-Russian-
German sabotage group at a mine in Jaszowice, “tore the conveyor belts, hid the tips of mining
drills, and, instead of coal, loaded stones.”22 In another case, four hundred Russian and German
political prisoners working at the Heinkel-Werke aircraft plant conspired to use magnetized wires
to disorient plane navigation systems. The workers were able to sabotage an entire fleet of air-
craft without the inspectors finding any faults: “out of a total of one hundred twenty aircraft
assembled, not a single one was fit for use.23 In some cases, organized sabotage efforts were
successful in creating larger-scale disruptions by undermining entire infrastructure projects. In
the spring of 1942, when the crematorium at Dachau was deemed unfit, the camp management
ordered a larger one to be built complete with its own ovens and gas chamber. The German Capo
in charge of the project was a communist, and intent on hindering the construction effort. His
instruction to the workers was to the tune of: “Comrades, the gas chamber through which all
of us may be intended to march must never be finished! Work slowly? No, sabotage whatever
you can!”24 Though they did complete the crematorium, the “cement did not bond properly, the
foundation turned out to be too weak, and the mortar in the brickwork crumbled so that the
whole unit had to be torn down and put up again.”25 The second construction was rushed, and
the SS were forced to abandon the extra gas chamber.

Pure Negation
The passion for destruction is a creative passion, too! —Mikhail Bakunin

16
DEGOB: Protocol 407
17
DEGOB Protocol 704
18
Langbein 305
19
Langbein 305
20
Langbein 306
21
Langbein 306
22
Wasowicz 247
23
Wasowicz 249
24
Langbein 304
25
Langbein 304

22
 It is ridiculous to even contemplate co-existing with this fascist apparatus. It all has to
be destroyed to start afresh. We will taste the fruits from the trees we’ve grown ourselves
in the ashes of their empire. —Anonymous, Incitement to Burn

The call from Bakunin to embrace the destructive urge forms the backbone of both anarchist
and anarcho-nihilist thought. The latter takes this axiom and runs with it, arguing that in the
face of global systems of domination our sole aim should be to destroy all that constitutes those
systems. This stands in direct contrast to other anarchist tendencies that place at least some em-
phasis on “positive programs” — aspirations to construct something ideal in the present world
or to craft plans in preparation for the downfall of the current system. Anarcho-nihilism under-
stands the positive program as “one that confuses desire with reality and extends that confusion
into the future” by either making promises about what a revolutionary future might hold, or
attempting to bring those conditions about from within the existing order.26 Such positive as-
pirations offer nothing more than a dangling carrot for us to pursue in a situation in which the
stick, string, and prize all need to be destroyed. The example of those living under Nazi rule
illustrates a situation in which, for those deemed Ballastexistenzen, positive visions were unfath-
omable: establishing long-term projects or alternative infrastructure would be ludicrous, except
to the extent that they facilitated the destruction of the existing order. So long as Hitler reigned,
no Jewish commune would be tolerated, no anarchist child-care collective could ever hope to
thrive. To be immersed in a social order as violent and controlling as Nazi Germany warranted
a reaction of absolute hostility, attacks aimed at every level of society — pure negation. So too
does anarcho-nihilism understand the existing order of today as without potential for a positive
agenda. Whatever we build within its bounds will be co-opted, destroyed, or turned against us:
“We understand that only when all that remains of the dominant techno-industrial-capitalist sys-
tem is smouldering ruins, is it feasible to ask what next?”27 According to this line of thought,
our situation today is similar to the Lagers to the extent that positive projects, attempts to create
a new world in the shell of the old, are simply out of place. Aragorn! writes: “Nihilism states
that it is not useful to talk about the society you ‘hold in your stomach’, the things you would
do ‘if only you got power’…What is useful is the negation of the existing world.”28 Similarly,
imprisoned members of the CCF write:

We anarcho-nihilists …don’t talk about ‘transformation of social relations’ towards a

more liberated view, we promulgate their total destruction and absolute annihilation.
Only through total destruction of the current world of power… will it be possible to
build something new. The deeper we destroy, the more freely will we be able to
build.29

The visions that rebels tend to entertain about what life will be like After The Revolution
are not only unproductive, they are dangerous because they presume that a unified vision of
life is desirable. Such forward-looking conversations attempt to herd an infinite spectrum of
possibilities onto an ideal anarchist path. The CCF write:

26
Anarchy and Nihilism: Consequences 13
27
325: An Insurgent Zine of Social War and Anarchy 20
28
Nihilism, Anarchy and the 21st Century 18
29
A Conversation Between Anarchists 23

23
 Very often, even in anarchist circles, the future organization of ‘anarchist’ society is
discussed along with the role of work, self-management of the means of production,
direct democracy, etc. According to us, this kind of debate and proposal looks like
the construction of a dam that tries to control the impetus of the abundant stream
of Anarchy.30

Even resisters in the concentration camps sometimes concerned themselves with this kind
of political fantasizing: In Buchenwald, for instance, three underground political organizations
banded together in 1944 to plan out the future governance of Germany, at a time when other
organizations in the camp were focused on saving lives and staging coordinated resistance.31
Nihilism urges us to consider the fact that such forward planning is simply unnecessary and
that it obfuscates our more urgent goal of negation: “There’s no need to know what’s happening
tomorrow to destroy a today that makes you bleed.”32
From the foundation of this critique, nihilism identifies a common trap experienced by anar-
chists: the magnetic compulsion to identify ourselves positively within society even though we
strive for its destruction. In my local context, this often looks like anarchists responding to crit-
ics of property destruction with reminders of all that we contribute to society (when we are not
rioting, we are community organizers, Food Not Bombs chefs, musicians, etc.).
Negation, however, is justified by the existence of a ruling order, not by our credentials as
activists. Our riots are justified not because we contribute, but because we exist under the heel
of a monstrous society. Positive projects are the means of surviving within that order; negation
is the project of destroying it completely. As Alejandro de Acosta reminds us, we must not be
tempted to “frame destructive action as having any particular goal beyond destruction of the
existent.”33 Bæden too rails against this tendency, insisting that we have nothing to gain from
hiding our true intentions:

We understand destruction to be necessary and we desire it in abundance. We have

nothing to gain through shame or lack of confidence in these desires. This world…
must be annihilated in every instance, all at once. To shy away from this task, to
assure our enemies of our good intentions, is the most crass dishonesty.34

When we call ourselves anarchists, or even “anti-capitalists,” we are implying a commitment

to the destruction of systems of domination — why do we so often shy away from this? Nihilism
unabashedly embraces negation as being at the core of such positions.

Jouissance
Despite its gloomy connotations, the commitment to pure negation finds its most interesting
manifestations as a joyful, creative, and limitless project. Most notably, Bæden utilizes the French

30
A Conversation Between Anarchists 22
31
Wasowicz 119
32
In Cold Blood 10
33
De Acosta 9–10
34
Bæden Vol. I 12–13

24
word jouissance,35 which directly translates to “enjoyment,” but takes on a variety of connota-
tions related to “uncivilized desire,” those aspects of our existence which “escape representation,”
a “shattering of identity and law,” and that which “shatters our subjective enslavement to capi-
talist civilization.36 Jouissance is an ecstatic energy, felt but never captured, that pushes us away
from any form of domination, representation, or restraint, and compels us towards fierce wild-
ness and unmitigated recalcitrance. It is “the process that momentarily sets us free from our
fear of death” and which manifests as a “blissful enjoyment of the present,” or a “joy which we
cannot name.”37 Jouissance is the richness of life evoked by resistance, the spirit that allowed
Mária Jakobovics to continue her acts of sabotage despite the sting of the club or the threat of
the noose, and the spirit that perhaps allows many of us to lead lives of resistance in absolutely
overwhelming circumstances. It is the visceral experience of negation as ecstatic liberation.
Although the spirit of jouissance animates many anarchist texts, nihilism seems to approach
it with the most naked embrace; for many nihilists, jouissance is the core of anarchism. Without
expectations of the world to come, without deference to moral code, and without adherence to
a right way to do things, nihilism embraces the act of resistance as a goal in itself. Through this
lens, the joy of pissing in a Nazi rocket cannot easily be measured against its risks or results — in
jouissance, we find a richness of life unattainable under the status quo. Without using the word
explicitly, some imprisoned members of the CCF describe jouissance perfectly: “Neither victory
nor defeat is important, but only the beautiful shining of our eyes in combat.”38 This emphasis on
the act, without attachment to its outcomes, is one of the aspects of nihilism that has made it such
a puzzling force for other anarchists. Critics of nihilism see this sort of emphasis on jouissance
and negation as simply a form of indulgent retreat into the realm of personal experience, “because
it hurts too much to hope for the improbable, to imagine a future we can’t believe in.”39 While
this critique has some merit, I think it largely misses the strength of the nihilist position and
the beauty of jouissance. Whatever we may chose to do with it, however strategic, ambitious,
or optimistic we may feel, our understanding of why we resist can still be solidly rooted in a
place of jouissance. I think the nihilist position leaves space for victories, while still recognizing
that our capacity to win is quite different from our commitment to liberatory action. Even when
we run out of optimistic rhetoric and inspiring stories, our lives can still be oriented against the
grain of society. Even from a place of utter hopelessness, we can still find the jouissance in our
bodies to attack. Once again, the CCF insist that

what really counts is the strength we feel every time we don’t bow our heads, every
time we destroy the false idols of civilization, every time our eyes meet those of our
comrades along illegal paths, every time that our hands set fire to the symbols of
Power. In those moments we don’t ask ourselves: ‘Will we win? Will we lose?’ In
those moments we just fight.40

Jouissance is that which animates resistance for its own sake so that even if we have no future,
we can still find life today.
35
A word that also has a strong history in Lacanian psychoanalysis, poststructuralism, and feminist theory.
36
Bæden Vol. I 66, 43, 44, 55
37
Bæden Vol. I 44, 73, 53
38
A Conversation Between Anarchists 11
39
Zlodey 6
40
A Conversation Between Anarchists 12

25
Spontaneous resistance & Time
Do you know how one says ‘never’ in camp slang? ‘Morgen früh’, tomorrow morning.
—Primo Levi

Nihilism allows for the possibility that there is no future. —Aragorn!

One of the connections that jumped out at me early on in my research was a continuous refer-
ence to time in both anarcho-nihilist and holocaust literature. While Häftlinge describe horrific
experiences of the obliteration of time, nihilists often call for unmitigated attacks against time
itself (No Future has become something of a dark motto1 ). This section will set out to explore
this connection and to understand what is meant by the anarcho-nihilist ambition to “stop time.”2
The concept of ‘futurity,’ the sense that one has a future under the existing order, threads these
subjects together and provokes a discussion about the radical possibilities of chronological rup-
ture. Those who experienced a complete rupture of futurity in the camps (e.g. realized what the
chimneys were for, gave up on allied liberation, etc.) often sunk into a grim and catatonic state,
but in some instances they reacted ferociously. Though the most well-known acts of physical
resistance against the Nazis were planned and coordinated actions, there were also countless
unplanned attacks that plagued the Nazi thirst for order and obedience. Of the stories that have
been passed down to us, scant details survive. Some of these stories are patched together from
multiple, partial witnesses, while others are merely inferred from the silences they created. These
act of spontaneous resistance resonate deeply with anarcho-nihilism, for nowhere else does the
rallying cry of No Future apply as well as to those who responded to utterly hopeless situations
with acts of fierce abandon. Inmates who physically confronted their oppressors were not en-
gaged in a “rational political struggle for a better future,” but rather understood the futility of
their situations and chose to fight back regardless.3 These moments can help us to understand
what is at stake in our rethinking of time and what it might mean for us to sever ourselves from
oppressive chronological modes.

Spontaneous Resistance in the Lagers

We are entering the time of wordless revolts, the time of illogical revolts, which must in
turn be massacred. —Silence and Beyond

In Treblinka, on August 36, 1942, when a young Jewish man wasn’t permitted to say goodbye to
his mother, he wrestled a knife from a Ukrainian guard and stabbed him. The man and everyone
else on his transport was shot.4
1
Attentat 109
2
The Invisible Committee 94
3
Bæden Vol. I 45
4
Langbein 289

26
 On September 11, 1942, after watching his wife and child be selected for the gas chambers in
Treblinka, Meir Berliner attacked an SS man with a knife, stabbing him to death and leaving the
knife protruding from his back. Berliner and over a hundred of his fellow inmates were “cruelly
killed.”5
In 1942, as fifteen hundred Polish Jews were being escorted off a train at Auschwitz, a Jewish
Capo named Morris discreetly informed some of them that they were being led to their death.
Unrest spread throughout the crowd and eventually turned into an attack against the SS guards.
Forty members of Morris’s Kommando joined in the fight. The entire transport and Kommando
were killed.6
On October 17, 1944, Hanna Lévy-Hass, an inmate of Bergen-Belsen whose diary survived the
war, recorded that her camp was put on severe lockdown and that rumors had circulated about
a women’s rebellion in the neighboring camp. The only evidence of this rebellion for Levy-Hass
was the cessation of all regular camp activity and the glow of the crematorium, which operated
nonstop throughout the night.7
On the night of February 1, 1945, a group of Russian and British POWs, as well as nineteen
Luxembourg policemen who refused to join the SS, rebelled as they were being led out of Sach-
senhausen to be executed in a surrounding forest. One inmate managed to wrestle a gun away
from a guard and fatally shoot him. All of the inmates were subsequently killed by SS machine
gun fire.8
In late 1942 at Treblinka, a transport of around two thousand Jews refused to enter the gas
chamber. Those who yelled out invocations of resistance were beaten, but the call was heard and
no one budged. At one point some of them rushed the SS, and, fighting with knives and bottles,
injured three guards. Somehow during this scuffle, a hand grenade exploded that also injured a
guard. The entire transport was shot.9
Twice in 1943 the train station at Sobibór saw spontaneous rebellions by inmates, who fought
with stones, pots, and bottles against armed guards; one of these scuffles saw several guards in-
jured. In both cases, all inmates involved were killed.10 Also in Sobibór, Richard Rashke informs
us that a group of women (many of whom held children) realized that they weren’t being taken
to a normal shower and became unruly, attacking the guards with bare hands. The SS sprayed
them with machine guns. Those they missed were stuffed into the gas chambers.”11
Filip Müller tells a deeply disturbing story of a small group of Jewish families who, after hiding
in dug-outs in southern Poland for four months, were discovered and brought to Birkenau to be
killed. As in many other stories, one mother dedicated her final moments to comforting her
infant daughter, even as they were led to a wall to be shot by a Nazi named Voss. Müller watched
as the two performed a macabre dance: Voss circling trying to figure out where best to shoot
the infant, while the mother reflexively turned to keep her daughter away from the barrel of the
gun. Eventually Voss grew frustrated and shot the child three times. As he turned his gun on

5
Langbein 289
6
Garlinksi 237
7
Lévy-Hass 69
8
Langbein 279
9
Langbein 289
10
Langbein 295
11
Rashke 62

27
the mother, “she lost all self-control and flung her daughter straight at her murderer’s head.”12
Stunned, Voss wiped the blood off of his face and dropped his gun, clearly unable to carry on.
Another guard quickly took over and finished the job.
Marla Zimetbaum, who became a well-known name in Birkenau for her selfless organizing in
the camp and for her spectacular escape with a Polish lover, cemented her legendary status when,
after being captured and brought back to the camp, she used her last moments under the gallows
to defy the Nazis: Before the SS could put the noose around her neck, she cut her own vein with
a small razor and, “in the presence of all her fellow inmates, hit an SS man in the face with her
bleeding hand.”13 Olga Lengyel, who worked covertly during her time in Birkenau smuggling
parcels for a resistance organization, has a different recollection of what is undoubtedly the same
incident. She recalls that a woman had escaped with her Polish lover using stolen SS uniforms,
but was recaptured and brought back to the camp. When the Nazis tried to parade her around
the camp (wearing a placard labeling her as an escapee) as part of her punishment, she resisted
and was beaten severely, though was able to land at least one punch on a guards face. In addition
to this astonsihing show of defiance, Lengyel recalls that as the woman near-lifeless body was
being loaded onto a truck to be taken to the gas chambers, she yelled: “Courage friends! They
will pay! Liberation is near!”14
On October 23 1943, seventeen hundred Jews transported from Warsaw to Auschwitz were
escorted to the gas chambers. When about two-thirds of them had already been taken into the
chamber, a rebellion broke out among the remaining several hundred who were in the undressing
room. Of what unfolded only foggy, sometimes contradictory details survive: four armed SS
officers entered the undressing room, one of them was disarmed by a woman and fatally shot,
the other inmates were spurred to action. They cut the electric wires and attacked the other
guards, a shootout ensued between the guards at the door and the inmates, and ultimately all of
the remaining inmates were led out and shot.15 In one version of this story, the woman was an
actress named Katerina Horowitzová, and she retaliated after SS man Josef Schillinger told her to
remove her bra: “she whipped off her garment and startled him by hitting him with it in his eyes.
While he was blinded by pain, she grabbed his revolver and shot him and another guard.”16 In
another version, her retaliation came after Schillinger told her to dance naked.17 In another, the
woman was named Franceska Mann, and she retaliated when Schillinger snatched the bra off of
her body.18 In yet another telling, the woman was an unnamed dancer who intentionally seduced
the SS men while she was undressing, and while they ogled her she smashed one of them in the
forehead with her high heel and then disarmed and shot Schillinger and one other guard.19 The
incident “gave rise to legends” and reminded inmates that SS men “were also mortal”.20 Rumors
about this rebellion quickly spread throughout the camp and inspired another act of resistance
later that same day, of which even less is known. The sole witness to this incident was privy only
to the aftermath: the sight of strewn corpses in front of crematorium IV. The fact that the bodies
12
Müller 72
13
Langbein 192
14
Lengyel 112
15
Jan Van Pelt 572; Wasiwicz 47; Garlinksi 237; Langbein 280
16
Laska 180
17
“Prayer for Katerina Horovitz”
18
Langbein 280
19
Müller 87
20
Langbein 280

28
were still clothed implies that a group of inmates hadn’t allowed themselves to be taken into the
undressing room and were massacred.21

Lager-time, Despondency, and Timelessness

One day of insurrection is worth a thousand centuries of normality —Wolves of Soli-
darity, Pacific Column

Each of these moments reflects a shattering of illusion, a fierce visceral reaction to oppression,
a desperate act in a totally hopeless situation. Liberation in these moments was not necessarily
a material gain, but a fleeting lived experience; an existential reorientation from a relationship
of domination to one of recalcitrance. Pure jouissance. Some of these attacks resonated widely
outside of their perimeter and punctured holes in the Nazi facade of invulnerability, perhaps even
inspiring others to fight back. Other attacks simply dissipated in a hail of gunfire. Regardless,
each of them seem to defy any notion of hope or strategy, and the very fact that each story ends
with a mass slaughter gestures towards a spirit of resistance that prioritized lived revolt over
futurity.
In the concentration universe as in the nihilist framework, conceptions of time become ex-
tremely important. How we understand time, its movement, and our place within it, shapes how
we understand the existing order and the potentials for resistance. While some anarchists have
attempted to imagine “how free people have conceived of different shapes of time itself,” here
we will solely be concerned with how oppressive modes of time are ruptured.22 For Häftlinge,
this rupture involved breaking free from three states of chronological awareness: despondency,
futurity, and a paralyzing suspension in the present. For anarcho-nihilists, focus has centered
largely on breaking free from progressive conceptions of time and false senses of futurity. In
both realms, we find an insurrectionary potential that exists outside of dominant modes of time.
Walter Benjamin’s concept of “messianic time” will offer us a vocabulary to describe this trans-
gression.
We begin in the concentration camps, where experiences of time were precarious and fraught
with implications. In one sense, inmates were beckoned towards what we will call “Lager-time,”
which is the series of hoops and tribulations through which Nazis created the illusion of fu-
turity, the promise of survival best encapsulated in the Auschwitz slogan “Freedom Through
Work.” People were told that they were being taken to Sweden, but stepped out of the trains into
Auschwitz; they were told they were being taken for delousing, but never left the crematorium;
they were told that work would set them free, but they were literally worked to death. This ongo-
ing promise of futurity kept many inmates docile in a system that ultimately produced only two
things — German wealth and corpses. While the shattering of Lager-time was seemingly the first
step to resistance, such a rupture did not necessarily carry insurgent possibilities. For many, the
abandonment of futurity simply meant despondency; many souls were broken when the illusion
of Lager-time was peeled back to reveal an assembly line of death. For countless inmates, the
alternative to futurity was the suicidal allure of the electric fence, which offered an immediate
escape from the horror of despondency. Others experienced a complete disintegration of the

21
Langbein 280
22
Bæden Vol. II 41

29
mind and body. Such living-dead creatures, those whose hearts still beat but for whom death
was a foregone conclusion, even had a name within the camps: Muselmann.23 While the Nazis
actively fostered a myth of futurity through work and obedience, they simultaneously created
the conditions of hopelessness, which for some was akin to death.
For those who did not succumb to despair, the key to survival lay within the tension between
Lager-time and suicidal despondency. Throughout holocaust memoirs, there is a sense of total
immersion in the present, something we will call “suspension.” This experience involved the
violent eradication of past and future, resulting in an unblinking commitment to survival in the
present moment. From the Warsaw ghetto we hear: “Everything taking place outside the Ghetto
walls became more and more foggy, distant, strange. Only the present day really mattered.”24
From Auschwitz:
Why worry oneself trying to read into the future when no action, no word of ours
could have the minimum influence?… our wisdom lay in ‘not trying to understand,’
not imagining the future, not tormenting ourselves as to how and when it would all
be over; not asking others or ourselves any questions.25
Survival meant forgetting about your past life, abandoning thoughts of future liberation, and
sinking deeply into the eternal present: “Survival meant thinking of today.”26 In her diary from
Bergen-Belsen, Hannah Lévy-Hass reflects on her inability to remember anything about her life
before the camps: “The horror that surrounds us is so great that the brain becomes paralyzed and
completely incapable of reacting to anything that doesn’t stem directly from the nightmare we
are presently living through and this is constantly before our eyes.”27 Soma Morgenstern, writing
on the psychological impacts of the Lagers, concludes that the “key issue was the tyranny of the
present — a tyranny that arose from the total uncertainty about the future and led to a destruction
of ‘the softest tissue of life’: memory.”28 This experience of suspension, a total immersion in the
present moment, seemed to be the key to enduring the horrors of everyday life. In this state of
suspension, however, resistance was still an impossibility.
Imagine yourself walking a tightrope five hundred feet in the air with a powerful strobe light
held in front of your face. Are you worried about the future? Try remembering the past. Can
you waste seconds thinking about the person who put you in this situation or how you might
fight back against them? To survive even a moment in such a situation would require an intense,
unblinking focus on the immediate present. This is the spell of suspension. This is how people
endured the camps.
That being said, a few managed to break this spell and enter into something much more fierce,
as exemplified by the stories above. For those Häftlinge who saw their deaths as a foregone
conclusion, who had already seen their cities raided, their families gassed, and their culture oblit-
erated, retaliation against the Nazi regime became the only experience left. Rose Meth, one of the
23
Survival in Auschwitz 88. “Musselman” is also the German word for Muslim. Though there’s no certainty
on the origins of this slang, one theory poses that the physical symptoms of a person near death — unable to stand,
rocking back and forth, etc. — evokes images of a Muslim praying. Problematic to be sure, and disturbing beyond
belief.
24
Edelman 39
25
Levi 116
26
Langbein 53
27
Lévy-Hass 60
28
Jan Van Pelt 557

30
women who assisted in the Auschwitz uprising, speaks to this liberatory space when she reflects
on her incredibly risky decision to smuggle gunpowder out of a munitions factory: “Of course I
agreed right away because it gave me a way to fight back. I felt very good about it, and I didn’t
care about the danger.”29 Though some might simply read this as bravery, in this context we can
perhaps read it as an expression of jouissance, and perhaps even glimpse the experience of some-
one who inhabited an entirely different chronological mode. Rose was not holding onto hope for
the future or sinking into despair, nor was she suspended in the “tyranny of the present” — from
the spectrum of despondency, suspension, and futurity, a rupture forms and reveals a space of
insurrectionary possibilities, which Walter Benjamin calls “messianic time.”30 Before expanding
on this idea, we will first explore the anarcho-nihilist critique of progressivism and reproductive
futurity.

Anarcho-Nihilism, Progressivism, and Futurity

The reality is that the future never comes, but is rather the ideological justification for
the suppression of our desires and revolutionary change today. Tomorrow becomes just
the romantic notion of accepting subjugation today. —Bryan Hill

Anarcho-nihilism is interested in the extent to which severing ourselves from dominant modes
of time can open up incendiary possibilities. This involves dispelling the myth of progressivism,
the idea that history is a linear story of progress, as well as the myth of reproductive futurity,
the idea that what is best for future generations is the continuance of the existing order. Be-
cause of the way these ideologies frame our relationship to time, they both prevent meaningful
opportunities for negation now.
The first issue of Bæden takes as one of its central concerns a critique of progressivism; that
is, the conception of time that frames history as a narrative of progress (i.e. things are getting
better over time and we are rapidly moving towards a brighter future). We feel this progress
in our bodies as the excitement of technological advancement and architectural achievements;
we embrace it as we watch our petitions and protests and riots get bigger and bigger; we fall
victim to it every time we express “amazement that the [terrible] things we are experiencing are
still possible” in the 21st century.31 Many anarcho-nihilist thinkers point towards Marxism as
the source of progressivism in anarchist thought. The chronology offered by Marxism depicts
the present moment as part of a steady historical progression from feudalism to socialism (albeit
with a couple terrifying pit stops along the way). Aragorn! writes:

The conception of history that came out of the Marxist tradition (dialectical materi-
alism) dictated that the transformation of society would pass through capitalism… to
transform into socialism and eventually communism. This meant that progressivism
was embedded within this (the dominant) branch of socialism.32

The myth that we are somehow moving forward forms the backbone of the socialist tradition.
29
Gurewitsch 301
30
Bæden Vol. I 109
31
Benjamin 257
32
Nihilism, Anarchy and the 21st Century 14

31
 Many anarchists have argued that this teleological framework is both ludicrous in its prophetic
optimism, and stifling in its programmatic assertions (i.e. that our job is to find ways to advance
society into a state of socialism). The progress of society is an illusion created by clever historians
and propagandists, and the idea that somehow this historical train is locked into a track that leads
to our shared liberation is both intoxicating and toxic. The “progress of society” might be better
described as the “evolution of systems of power,” and as Bæden reminds us: “any progressive
development can only mean a more sophisticated system of misery and exploitation.”33 In its
refusal of Marxist teleology, Bæden takes up the ideas of Walter Benjamin to call for an attack
on this kind of progressivism: “Marx says that revolutions are the locomotive of world history.
But perhaps it is quite otherwise. Perhaps revolutions are an attempt by the passengers on this
train… to activate the emergency break.”34 Anarcho-nihilism replaces the program of historical
acceleration with one of negation. Rather than moving ourselves quickly along the train tracks
of history towards a socialist utopia, we must derail the train and rupture history altogether.
Like the trains bound for Auschwitz, this movement of history is heading nowhere good and
needs to be sabotaged at every possible turn.
Whereas once this progressivism was the domain of bright-eyed revolutionaries, capitalism
has seized the tradition, meaning that we are now assaulted with it from all angles — whether
through austerity and democratic participation or through patient and restrained “movement
building,” we are constantly being asked to tolerate intolerable conditions today in order to work
towards a brighter future. Using Lee Edelman’s queer theory text No Future as a frame work,
Bæden sets out to explore how progressivism is used by mainstream society to keep us attached
to the existing order. They argue that futurity is ubiquitously packaged with the image of The
Child, the ultimate symbol of our commitment to the future — we must work now, we must com-
promise now, we must be patient now, in order to secure the well being of the next generation. The
unspoken and dubious premise of this reasoning is that what is best for future generations is
the preservation of the existing order. Through this lens, the widely-felt social pressure to have
children is actually an obligation to reproduce society and capitalism. The term “reproductive
futurity” refers to the way in which the very concept of reproduction becomes imbued with a
commitment to the existing order. Bæden writes: “The ideology of reproductive futurism ensures
the sacrifice of all vital energy for the pure abstraction of the idealized continuation of society.”35
Because this emphasis on securing a future for The Child prevents us from negating our present
conditions, Bæden asks us to sever once and for all our attachment to reproductive futurity. The
futures that are being dangled in front of our faces are a mirage that will continuously retreat as
we move closer, and the cute, sacred image of The Child is often what prevents us from question-
ing that mirage. Instead, nihilism asks us to cut ourselves from any attachment to reproductive
futurity, and instead “fight, hopeless, to tear our lives away from that expanding horizon and to
erupt with wild enjoyment now.”36 What nihilism glimpses outside of progressivism and repro-
ductive futurity is perhaps similar to what Rose Meth saw when she chose to resist despite a lack
of hope: the insurrectionary mode of messianic time.

33
Bæden Vol. I 12
34
Benjamin, qtd. in Bæden Vol. I 108
35
Bæden Vol. I 24
36
Bæden Vol. I 88

32
Messianic Time
What is to be gained by shattering the progressive conception of time or by abandoning our
attachment to futurity? How can we conceive of the chronological mode embodied by those
inmates who escaped Lager-time, despair, and suspension, and fought back? Bæden once again
turns to Benjamin and the concept of messianic time, which is an “irrational now-time,” an “in-
terruption of linear time,” and which exists as “splinters diffused through the empty fabric of
capitalist time.”37 As a rupture from oppressive chronological modes, it contains “unlimited pos-
sibilities” and “threatens to interrupt the continuum of history.”38 The Invisible Committee,39 also
taking inspiration from Benjamin, applies this concept to resistance generally: “Every attempt to
block the global system, every movement, every revolt, every uprising should be seen as a verti-
cal attempt to stop time.”40 Here we might remember those rebels who spent the first evening of
the July revolution of 1830 shooting out clock towers in Paris,41 or the (semi-mythical) anarchist
Biofilo Panclasta who, in the final days of his life, is said to have escaped from an old folks’ home
and climbed to the top of a clock tower where he “arrested the movement of the clock’s hands,
which so carefully marked the passage of time.”42 When the monotonous rhythms of society’s
clocks have ceased and the death march of progress has been brought to a halt, messianic time
is the space where new forms of life can be birthed. The CCF looks for this historical rupture in
the moment of an attack against a system, and in the precious moments afterwards, before the
system has turned its switches back on (e.g. after the riot, before the cleanup); these moments
of “unstuck time” are where our desires for the impossible come to the surface, and “in these
holes, negations against this world can be born.”43 This project of stopping time is an attempt
to break free from the ideologies of progressivism and the spell of reproductive futurity, and to
enter into combat with the existing order. Those in the camps who spontaneously fought back
knowing that death would be the immediate consequence erupted out of oppressive, paralyzing,
and illusory concepts of time, and entered into this space of messianic time.
Here I do not mean to argue that those who fought back in the Lagers experienced some mysti-
cal chronological transcendence that granted them supernatural bravery. Rather, I am pointing
towards the possibilities that exist when we confront our own futurelessness and find the will to
act: When we don’t believe the lies about where we’re heading, when we don’t sink into absolute
despair about how fucked we are, and when we don’t just keep our heads down and think about
the present moment — when we step out of that debilitating sequence and act against the existing
order, no matter the odds. This often means confronting death, imprisonment, alienation, and
a variety of other dangers. For the anarcho-nihilists, it also means opening oneself up to new
possibilities of being alive. These cries to “stop time” and to discover jouissance are essentially
asking us to sever any attachments we have to the existing order, and to position ourselves out-
side of and against its progress. So long as Häftlinge saw a future for themselves in the camps, or
remained suspended in the present moment, or gave up on living completely, the Nazis would

37
Bæden Vol. I 109
38
Bæden Vol. I 109
39
Who often speak the same language as nihilists, but arrive at some different conclusions.
40
The Invisible Committee 94
41
Benjamin 262
42
Rolling Thunder 146
43
In Cold Blood 10

33
never have to deal with a moment of defiance. By shattering those chronological modes, some
inmates broke with the rhythms of the camp and carved out a different fabric of time. Similarly,
so long as we believe that this society is making progress, and so long as we can glimpse a future
for ourselves within it or a future for our children, we will remain in some way wed to it. When
anarcho-nihilism urges us to abandon those chronological modes, it is in essence asking us to
sever all ties to the continuation of society and work instead to negate its existence. In this rup-
ture of time we find a richness of life unimaginable within the existing order. Messianic time is
the chronological awareness in which jouissance can flourish, for rather than deferring our rage
to the future we can finally realize that now is the time we’ve been waiting for.

34
Organizations and Major Uprisings
Overview of Organizations in Lagers
Expect nothing from organizations. Defy all the existing milieus, and above all, refuse
to become one. —The Invisible Committee

While the thoughts of a sustained resistance organization existing inside of a concentration

camp seemed ludicrous to me when I began this project, the fact is that most camps saw the emer-
gence of not one but several formal, long-term organizations. Even in camps where organizing
was next to impossible — because of particularly high death and transfer rates, low numbers of
political prisoners, or a dominance of “greens” (German prisoners) in prominent positions, — re-
sistance groups still formed and, to various degrees, were able to impact life in the camps. The
mandates of these organizations generally involved some combination of the following: building
networks within the camp; communication with the outside world; boosting the morale of in-
mates; organizing escapes; sabotage; mutual aid; weeding out informants; and getting members
into prominent positions. Communist organizations (which were the most common throughout
the camps) maintained educational programs, offering lectures on dialectical materialism, po-
litical economy, and the history of the worker’s movement from memory or with contraband
textbooks.1 In some cases, resistance groups set themselves the ambitious task of preparing for
armed resistance against the Nazis by stockpiling arms and organizing into specialized battle
groups. This was more common in the later years of the war as the camps became distended and
as rumors spread about impending liquidations (i.e. the mass murder of all remaining inmates).
At times, the various groups within the camps coexisted with a great deal of friction, unwilling to
work with one another due to ideological differences, pre-war hostilities, or outright prejudice;
at other times, powerful solidarities across nationality, language, and ideology were forged.
The Buchenwald camp had among the most developed and effective underground networks
of any camp, offering a glimpse into the organizational capacities that existed. Within this one
camp (which housed a population ranging from 10,000 to 110,000 inmates during the war), there
were underground groups of Social Democrats, Christian Democrats, Polish Communists, Soviet
POWs, Belgians, Italians, Czechs, Hungarians, Yugoslavs, and a Dutch group that had representa-
tives of Social Democrats, liberals, and Catholics.2 German Communists were the largest group
in the camp with over seven hundred members all arranged into cells of three to five people. The
French group in Buchenwald was lead by representatives of thirty-four regional and political
groups.3 For many years there was a great deal of infighting between organizations (particularly
between Communists and Social Democrats), and so in 1943, many of these groups came together

1
Wasowicz 121
2
Wasowicz 119–120
3
Langbein 172

35
to form the “International Camp Committee”. This group met bimonthly to “run an efficient mili-
tary organization, to perform sabotage acts, and to eliminate controversies and conflicts between
different nationalities.”4 As mentioned earlier, some of these organizations even had long-term
aspirations: in the spring of 1944, the German Popular Front Committee was formed with the in-
tention of bringing together German Communists, Social Democrats, and Christian Democrats to
plan out the future governance of Germany.5 In that same year, the Polish Communists, (which
had 130 adult and 60 youth members in the camp) joined with other Polish organizations to
form the “Anti-Fascist Committee” that would primarily concern itself with improving life in
the camp.6 Obviously, each of these organizations risked brutal consequences if their networks,
meetings, or conspiracies were discovered.
Within anarcho-nihilist literature, critiques of organizational models appear frequently and
lend themselves to an interesting (though complicated) dialogue with stories of concentration
camp resistance. Here, I’ll offer stories of three of the most significant mass uprisings to happen
in the camps (in Auschwitz, Treblinka, and Sobibór), with an eye to the question of organizations.
These stories are incredible in themselves, and also offer ample material to explore the reasons
that so many anarchists have severed themselves from conventional organizing models. My
purpose here is not to launch a scathing critique of concentration camp organizations — such
generalizations would be asinine considering the complexities and nuances of the situations in
which they operated. Resistance organizations, even those rife with cronyism and strategic flaws,
had an enormously important role in the Lagers, from the morale boost that helped get people
through another day, to the reorganization of camp life that put humane people into jobs formerly
occupied by sadistic thugs. That being said, within the history of mass uprisings in concentration
camps, formal organizations often had little to offer.
We begin in Poland, where a military officer initiated a resistance movement in some of the
harshest conditions imaginable.

The Resistance Movement in Auschwitz & The Sonderkommando

Uprising
It was necessary, in fact, to show Poles daily a mountain of Polish corpses before they
could be brought to agree together and to realize that, above all their differences and
hostile attitudes towards one another in the outside world, there was a more important
cause to be served, namely that of a common front against the common enemy. —Witold
Pilecki

The history of organized resistance in Auschwitz begins with the dramatic entry of Witold
Pilecki, a Polish military officer who had gone underground with the Home Army (AK) rather
than acquiesce to the invading Germans. Pilecki had spent the summer of 1940 petitioning his
superiors to send him into the newly-constructed camp in Auschwitz “in order to organize the
prisoners, look for means of resistance and mutual assistance, and send reports to Warsaw.”7

4
Wasowicz 122
5
Wasowicz 119
6
Wasowicz 119
7
Garlinski 19

36
Eventually they agreed, and on a brisk September morning Pilecki walked through a crowd of
people desperately fleeing a German round-up and into the hands of the SS. After two days of
being beaten, parched, and taught harsh lessons in collective responsibility, he found himself
at the front gates of Auschwitz. Though Pilecki’s writing is generally terse and factual, this
particular moment of his report stands out with chilling affect: “I bade farewell to everything I
had hitherto known on this earth and entered something seemingly no longer of it.”8
Inside the camp, Pilecki began work establishing the Union of Military Organization (ZOW)
by setting up his first “five,” a group of five members who would function as an anonymous cell
within a broader network. Eventually there would be thousands of members of the ZOW, largely
comprised of Poles with some degree of military experience. The other major group to emerge
within Auschwitz was the Kampfgruppe Auschwitz (the Fighting Group Auschwitz), a steadfastly
Communist organization started on May 1, 1943 with the intention of bringing together groups
of different nationalities. These two groups would eventually collaborate despite deep tensions
over leadership, national allegiances, and political ideology. Smaller resistance groups within
the camp included Spanish anti-fascists, German Communists, Polish Social Democrats, Austri-
ans of all political affiliations, a right-wing contingent of the National-Radical Camp, French
Communists, and at least two Yugoslavian groups in the women’s section of the camp.9
The various accomplishments of the Fighting Group and the ZOW are too long to enumerate
here, but suffice it to say they played a significant role in the daily life of the camp, even for
those oblivious to their existence. One pivotal impact of the ZOW was its development and
use of the camp hospital as a place of refuge and resistance. Due in part to the efforts of a
sympathetic green named Flans Bock, who had been appointed head of the sick bay in the early
days of Auschwitz (despite having no medical experience), the hospital was slowly established as
a place that was not only occasionally capable of healing people, but was also one of the central
pillars of the resistance movement. Underground activities in the hospital included establishing
contacts with patients, saving lives by falsely diagnosing illness (to avoid selections or work),
executing informants on the grounds of falsified illness, and most spectacularly, breeding lice
infected with typhus to be used as biological weapons — these lice were successfully used to kill
or disable informants, Capos, and even SS officers.10 The general reluctance of the SS to enter
the disease-ridden hospital made it one of the safer places for the organizations to operate.
Furthermore, both the ZOW and the Fighting Group were successful in sustaining contact
with the outside world and between sub-camps.11 Using a variety of ingenious methods, the
organizations were able to inform the outside world of what was happening in the camp, to
receive updates from the front lines, and to communicate about the possibilities for joint military
attacks on the camp. These methods included smuggling mail through corrupt guards or villagers
(on the marches between work and the camp), sending messages with escapees (or with one
of the few prisoners to be officially granted release),12 and sometimes simply using the postal
service (by bribing camp censors for pre-stamped envelopes).13 Perhaps the most stunning form

8
Pilecki 13
9
Wasowicz; Garlinski; Langbein
10
Garlinski 57
11
Auschwitz, Birkenau and Monowitz were sub-camps of the same broader Auschwitz complex.
12
Those very fortunate few who were ever granted a release from Auschwitz were required to sign a release
form stating that they had “no complaints” about the camp and that they were “satisfied” with their stay (Rees 30).
13
Langbein 245; Garlinski 66

37
of communication utilized by the resistance movement was Alfred Stossel’s construction of a
radio transmitter, which he operated for seven months from the hospital basement, broadcasting
details of transports and mass executions to the surrounding area.14 Despite intense searches
both inside and outside the camp, the SS never located the source of the broadcasts.
Near the end of the war, these channels of communication were used in a way that potentially
altered the course of Auschwitz’s history: In early 1944, sensing the dwindling morale and con-
fidence of the Germans, the Fighting Group (which was by now the camp’s dominant umbrella
organization) sent out the names of all SS men running the camp in hopes of having them widely
broadcast and so scaring the men out of committing further atrocities. The plan worked, as Lang-
bein writes: “the BBC in London put those persons on notice that they would be held responsible
for their atrocities, and the effect of the broadcast was clearly noticeable in the camp.”15 A simi-
lar message later that year reached the British government and informed them of an SS plan to
liquidate the camp: “This statement was made public, and in the end the SS abandoned its plan
to liquidate Auschwitz.”16
Throughout the entirety of their existence, both the ZOW and the Fighting Group Auschwitz
had been patiently planning for a militarily-supported overthrow of the camp. Neither the AK,
the British, the French, the Soviets, nor the partisans were ever able and/or willing to lend such
support, and the overthrow never took place. In spite of this, Auschwitz did see one major revolt.
It emerged not from within the resistance movement but from the Sonderkommando, a special
detail of mostly Jewish inmates who were tasked with running the crematories and gas chambers.
Though these workers were given certain privileges (bigger food rations, better bunks, etc.), their
labour, which involved facilitating the deaths of thousands of people every week, was among
the most murderous and psychologically strenuous. Filip Müller miraculously survived three
years in the Sonderkommando, which was mostly spent frantically ushering trains of people into
gas chambers, stripping the corpses of valuables, and then shoveling them into industrial ovens.
When the ovens proved insufficient for the sheer quantities of human flesh moving through the
camp, he and his team were made to dig and operate enormous burn-pits with built-in drain
pipes that channeled rivers of fat into buckets to be used as fuel for the next train. In due fashion,
the SS kept a high turnover rate of these positions in order to prevent information about these
assembly lines from getting out, and so no member of the Sonderkommando could expect to live
very long. Resistance from the Sonderkommando was almost unfathomable because of their level
of isolation from other prisoners, the privileges they clung to, and their short life expectancy.
Nevertheless, in 1944 some members of the Sonderkommando (which now numbered almost
one thousand workers) were spurred to action by the onslaught of Hungarian Jews that were
pouring into the gas chambers faster than the infrastructure could handle.17 This obscene in-
tensification of the killing operation, combined with the suspicion that the extermination of the
Hungarian Jews would surely be followed by the liquidation of the Sonderkommando, caused
some of the workers to approach the Fighting Group and craft a plan for revolt.18 The response
14
Garlinski 97–98
15
Langbein 58
16
Langbein 59. Though no concrete links can be drawn between the broadcast and the change of plan, many
historians have deduced that it played at least some role in the decision.
17
“During the summer of 1944, nearly half a million Hungarian Jews were transported to Auschwitz and gassed,
shot, or thrown alive into the ovens and burning pits of Birkenau” (Henry 178).
18
Tec 135; Langbein 286. At around the time the revolt was being planned, the SS did in fact begin the process
of liquidating the Sonderkommando by announcing that two hundred of them would be transferred to a sub-camp.

38
of the organization was one of reluctance — they felt that the “time was not ripe for a general up-
rising.”19 For the Sonderkommando, who expected their imminent slaughter, such strategic tact
was out of the question. A document unearthed from Auschwitz in 1962 that had been buried by
a member of the Sonderkommando, Salmen Lewenthal, chronicles the delays and tensions that
existed between them and the Fighting Group:
From the organization’s standpoint they were right, especially because they did not
feel they were in immediate danger of being exterminated… we concluded that if we
wanted to accomplish anything in life, we would have to act sooner… but unfortu-
nately they kept putting us off.20
By this point the Fighting Group was mostly fixated on the end of the war, hoping that a joint
attack on the SS could occur from inside and outside simultaneously. While those Jews who
had been working the crematoria saw the end of the war as an inevitable death sentence, the
Fighting Group saw it as a moment of possible liberation. Each time that the Sonderkommando
contacted the Fighting Group they were told to postpone their uprising until the front lines came
closer, which they eventually took to mean that “they stood alone.”21 Although the Fighting
Group refused to participate in the revolt or to provide guns, they did supply a small amount
of explosives that had been painstakingly smuggled out of a factory by female inmates over the
course of many months, which became pivotal in the Sonderkommando’s plan.
Because there are essentially no survivors of this revolt, our understanding of the events are
patchy. We know that the action was initiated early, but whether this happened because of
a drunk Russian worker, a nosy German Capo, or because the SS began the liquidation early
remains unclear.22 Whatever the prompt, on October 7, 1944, at about 1:30pm, several hundred
of the Sonderkommando in Crematorium IV attacked the SS with hammers, axes, and stones,
threw several home-made grenades, and blew up the crematorium itself. Realizing that the revolt
had begun early, the workers in Crematorium II also launched an attack, shoving a guard into
an oven, lighting the building on fire, and then attacking the SS.23 A hole was cut in the fence
leading to the women’s camp, where several of the barracks were set to be drenched in gasoline
and lit on fire — this never transpired, largely due to the uncoordinated timing.24 Some inmates
were able to cut through the exterior fence and escape, though many of these escapees were
later cornered in a barn and killed.25 Ultimately, Crematorium IV was damaged beyond use,
though how much impact this had on the killing operation is debatable since the end of the war
was so near. Everyone who revolted that day, including those who briefly escaped the walls of
Auschwitz, was killed,26 in addition to more than two hundred people who were later accused
These two hundred were loaded onto a wagon with food for the journey, and then taken directly to a gas chamber
nearby. Attempting to hide this slaughter from the rest of the Sonderkommando, the SS men took the bodies to the
crematoria at night and for the first time in the history of Auschwitz burned the bodies themselves (Langbein 286).
19
Langbein 285
20
Qtd. In Langbein 285
21
Jan Van Pelt 588
22
Gurewitsch 367; Langbein 285, Garlinski 238
23
Rees 257
24
Langbein 288
25
Langbein 288; Garlinski 239
26
Filip Müller was part of the Sonderkommando that revolted, but in his memoir he recounts that he spent most
of the uprising hiding inside of a chimney, and was able to escape into the general population of inmates later that
day.

39
of involvement.27 The political department spent weeks brutally interrogating all of the women
who may have had access to explosive material, beating them until “their bodies looked like
pieces of raw liver,” but it was unable to find anyone willing to confess or snitch.28 In the end,
the SS settled on four women to hold responsible, and on January 6, 1945, held the last public
execution in Auschwitz. Less than two weeks later the camp was evacuated — any inmate able
to walk participated in a death march through the snowy fields of Poland, while the infirm and
elderly were simply left behind. Whether this decision to evacuate (rather than liquidate) the
camp was based on the Fighting Group’s dispatch to the BBC, or perhaps to the rebellion of the
Sonderkommando, remains a matter of speculation.
(One of the often overlooked outcomes of the uprising was that it spared a group of women
who had been brought to the camp that morning and happened to be inside of the gas chambers
in Crematorium V when the rebellion broke out. After a short while waiting for their “shower”,
the door flung open and the women were hurriedly taken to a bunker due to the chaos that had
broken out. At least one woman from this group, Alice Lok Cahana, went on to survive the
camp.29 Thus, if nothing else, we know that the uprising did in fact save one life.)
In the end, the resistance organizations spent years organizing for a general uprising that never
happened.30 Instead, a group of desperate, informally-organized inmates staged what would be
the only coordinated insurrection in the history of Auschwitz. Unsurprisingly, harsh criticisms
of the organizations in Auschwitz have surfaced, not solely around their tension with the Son-
derkommando. Critics have accused the organizations of cronyism, arguing that the members
“helped only one another and later boasted that they had engaged in resistance activity.”31 Some
have accused the Fighting Group of rampant anti-semitism, and pointed out that this prejudice
played a role in their tension with the mostly-Jewish Sonderkommando.32 Similar accusations
have been levied against the Polish-dominated ZOW, who allegedly organized to save the lives
of Polish resistance fighters by switching their identities with Jewish inmates.33 Such critiques
have seemingly arisen from every camp in which organizations existed. The Communists in
Buchenwald, for instance, have been described as a “sworn community” which unquestioningly
looked out for its own members (regardless of their brutality, anti-semitism, etc.), and whose
“cliquishness was the object of criticism by outsiders.”34
As well as being criticized for their cronyism and anti-semitism, camp organizations have also
come under fire for their tendency to advocate restraint to those who sought immediate action,
as seen in the case of Auschwitz. Another example comes from Sachsenhausen, where a group
of Jewish Communists decided to resist transport to the gas chambers and took a plan for open
revolt and a request for arms to Communist leaders of a resistance organization. They were met
with deep reservations, for those in the organization felt responsibilities to the entire camp and
feared collective responsibility.35 The Jews fought back regardless, and with bare hands knocked
27
Rees 257
28
Gurewitsch 303
29
Rees 253–257
30
Garlinski 254
31
Langbein 54
32
Langbein 407 ff.44
33
Langbein 407 ff.44
34
Langbein 77. Nevertheless, even Eugen Kogon, one of the most vocal critics of the Communist party in Buchen-
wald, emphasizes that “the positive achievement of the Communists can hardly be overestimated.”
35
Langbein 191

40
several SS men to the ground before being contained. Yet another situation arose in Auschwitz, in
which a group of one hundred young boys, who had been orphans in the camp for many months,
were all taken to the hospital and killed by lethal injection, sparking mass outrage. Garlinski
writes:

…this pile of children’s bodies aroused such passions that the news passed like light-
ning through all the Blocks and Kommandos and raised tempers to boiling point. The
leaders had great difficulty in restraining their fellow-prisoners and underground
soldiers from uncoordinated reactions of rage and despair.

One survivor who experienced this frustrating tension with resistance organizations in
Auschwitz cynically concluded: “the Resistance in the camp is not geared for an uprising but for
the survival of the members of the Resistance.”36 This tension that existed in the camps between
individual desires and collective organizing touches on one of the core nerves of anarcho-nihilist
thought.

Anarcho-Nihilist Critique of Organizations

Organizations, legislative bodies, and unions: Churches for the powerless. Pawnshops
for the stingy and weak. —Renzo Novatore, 1920

By holding a stupid pistol, we have only taken one step in many for escaping from the
alienation of “Now is not the moment” and “The times are not ripe.” —OLGA Cell FAI/
IRF

The anarcho-nihilist critique of organizations stems from a common frustration with the bu-
reaucratic and managerial role of formal organizations in radical spaces. Though this frustration
is not new in anarchism,37 it has certainly seen a renewed, and perhaps more fierce articulation
in recent years from both insurrectionary and nihilist voices.38 Many contemporary anarchists
have sought to sever themselves completely from the model of formal organizations and to ori-
ent themselves towards more wild and joyous forms of coordinated action. One of the primary
themes of this critique is the extent to which organizations tend to defer action until the emer-
gence of a mass movement. Because nihilists seek the destruction of everything that comprises
society, and because that aspiration will never be shared by a majority (or even a substantial
portion) of the population, to wait for mass consensus is tantamount to defeat. The UK chapter
of the Informal Anarchist Federation (FAI) writes: “With all the billions of people who live in the
world, there will never be a time when a particular act against the State and Capital is felt by all or
36
Van Pelt 587
37
Bakunin argued that “political and organizational forms had held the social revolution back” and “that hierar-
chical and political means could never be used to gain social revolutionary ends,” (Do or Die). Malatesta argued: “in
order to achieve their ends, anarchist organizations must in their constitution and operation, remain in harmony with
the principles of anarchism; that is, they must know how to blend the free action of individuals with the necessity
and the joy of co-operation which serve to develop the awareness and initiative of their members,” (Do or Die). Renzo
Novatore… well, he just hated organizations.
38
Often the critiques from these two tendencies are nearly indistinguishable, though the results may differ dras-
tically.

41
even the majority of people to be appropriate, good, or desirable.”39 Rather than spend our lives
preparing for a mass awakening that likely will not happen, better to attack now and see where
it takes us. (It is worth noting here a difference between “deferred” action and “patient” action,
for in planning each of the bombings, shootings, and arsons that have defined the nihilist stance,
a great deal of patience has indeed been required — let’s not mistake urgency for impatience.)
A different cell of the FAI writes: “We don’t even give a minute of our life in the hope that the
multitude will suddenly become aware and wake up! If the oppressed are not ready to raise the
hatchet, this is a problem of the oppressed.”40 Thus, nihilism represents a strong anti-social turn
in anarchism, whereby instead of working to mobilize the masses and build a wide-based move-
ment, it prioritizes immediate attack rooted in individual desires. This “aristocratic contempt
for the common people,” as critics have labeled it, severs nihilists from the task of rousing the
“sheeple,” and allows for a different set of priorities.41
In its most basic expression, the anarcho-nihilist critique of organizations boils down to a
tension between the individual and the collective, whereby the nihilist individual refuses to com-
promise any of their insurrectionary desires for the sake of an imagined collective. To understand
this tension, we can think back to 2012 when the CEO of an Italian nuclear power company was
shot in the kneecap by two anarcho-nihilists who claimed the attack under the banner of the FAI.
After the attack (which was partly inspired by the 2011 nuclear disaster in Fukushima), the pair re-
leased a communique pointing to the various atrocities committed in the name of nuclear power
and calling for an all-out attack on the nuclear industry.42 In response to that action, the Anar-
chist Federation in Italy (a formal Marxist organization with no relationship to the FAI) issued a
response that condemned such a renegade action: “… we strongly criticize individualist and van-
guardist tactics that do not come out of a broad-based class-struggle movement. We condemn
actions that put workers in danger without their knowledge…”43 According to this perspective,
the individual acting without the validation of a formal collective, and without respect for work-
ing class solidarity, has no place in an anarchist movement. In counter-response to this (and
other condemnations), insurrectionary and nihilist keyboards ignited with scathing indictments
of this breed of “civil anarchism” that tries to restrain individual attacks behind the “working
class” banner. Venona Q, in one such essay titled “Scandalous Thoughts: A Few Notes on Civil
Anarchism”, writes: “The issue for me here is the same denial of individuality that the State im-
poses — some herding of unique human beings into some utilitarian category by pedagogues and
masters who find the individual unwieldy and dangerous, but find an abstract ideological cage
immensely comfortable.”44 Venona Q’s article diagnoses a long-term, cyclical process whereby
every so often a new generation of anarchists need to shed the constrictive skin of the collective
in order to reassert the role of the individual, and thus manage the tension of “the patriarchal
voice of ‘political reason’ against the wild rebel spirit.”45 Anarcho-nihilism is, in this light, a
fierce and unwavering shedding of that skin.

39
325 : An Insurgent Zine of Social War and Anarchy 25
40
A Conversation Between Anarchists
41
“Hic Nihil, Hic Salta!”
42
“Against The Corporations of Death” 1–2.
43
Anarchist Federation in Italy
44
Venona Q 25
45
Venona Q 25

42
 The way that this same tension played out in Auschwitz is fascinating, and we can cautiously
say it seems to bolster the nihilist critique. For all intents and purposes, the statement issued
by the Anarchist Federation in Italy could have been written by the Fighting Group Auschwitz,
which saw the renegade actions of the Sonderkommando as being reckless. Whereas the Fighting
Group was working towards the liberation of the whole camp (i.e. mass movement) and con-
demning anything that might endanger the other inmates (i.e. class solidarity), the Sonderkom-
mando represented a smaller affinity group, which although not inherently hostile towards the
other inmates, could not wait for them or the outside world to act. By refusing to defer their
attacks until a mass mobilization could be organized, by pushing back against a Marxist organiz-
ing body, and by acting with a “wild rebel spirit” in a totally hopeless situation, the actions of
the Sonderkommando resonate deeply with the anarcho-nihilist tendency.
One of the differences between the situation of the FAI and the Sonderkommando is the degree
of severity to which their actions would implicate others. While the FAI uses incendiary methods
knowing that other anarchists will experience such repercussions as arrests, house raids, and
grand jury indictments, the Sonderkommando acted knowing that it would result in the slaughter
of hundreds of people. This remains a real tension in contemporary nihilism and has led some
people to a place of paralysis. The authors of the journal Attentat (a word that refers to political
assassinations and similar violent acts) conclude that the repercussions of political violence in
today’s world are perhaps too great to justify: “It is not our central proposition that attentats
can, will, or should be the way to confront the state. We are not capable of the horror show that
would require.”46 Even without the constrictive role of organizations, nihilism still wrestles with
the implications of collective responsibility.
The other two major uprisings to be discussed both happened in extermination camps, where
long-term political organizing was an impossibility. These two events will lead us into an explo-
ration of nihilist forms of organizing.

The Sobibór Uprising

At Sobibór I am witnessing the tools of the modern age — trains, assembly lines, and
gas engines — used by the Germans to efficiently murder thousands of people on any
given day. And yet how new is this really? The primitive whips used by the Germans
are no different from those used by brutal slave masters for thousands of years. —Philip
Bialowitz

On the surface, Sobibór resembled a quaint frontier town complete with a pharmacist, tailor’s
shop, mining cars, and cabins marked with names like “Merry Flea” and “Swallow’s Nest.” Sun-
flowers and geraniums were carefully planted everywhere, particularly along the trail that led
to the north end of the camp, which was signed as the “Road To Heaven.”47 Underneath this
deceptive veneer (one specifically designed to calm prisoners), was a nightmarish reality and
a stunningly efficient extermination camp. Unlike the concentration camps — such as Ravens-
brück, Dachau, and Buchenwald, which housed long-term prisoner populations — to arrive at the
doorsteps of an extermination camp like Sobibór, Treblinka, or Chelmno meant that you were

46
Attentat 146
47
Bialowitz 32; Rashke 59

43
either being put into the gas chambers or being put to work filling them (Auschwitz held the
unique position of operating as both a concentration camp and an extermination camp for the
later years of the war). At any given time the SS had a crew of one hundred to seven hundred
Jewish workers operating every aspect of Sobibór; they were overseen by Capos from their midst,
who were in turn overseen by hundreds of Ukrainian guards, who were themselves subservient
to the German SS. Over the course of its nineteen months of operation, these workers were made
to facilitate the deaths of over 250,000 Jews, while also tending to the daily needs of their oppres-
sors.48 For the SS and Ukrainian guards overseeing this operation, entertainment often took the
most twisted forms: prisoners would be force-fed sand until they couldn’t walk and then paraded
around the camp; forced to climb trees that were then chopped down; forced to stand at attention
while Barry the dog chewed off pieces of their genitals and buttocks; forced to watch as living
babies were held by their legs and smashed around like pieces of meat before being tossed into
the mining cars for cremation.49 Every train that rolled into the station would bring a new trans-
port of thousands of people who would receive a cunningly reassuring welcome speech and then
be marched directly into the gas chambers. Those who worked at the train yard unloading and
preparing transports for gassing were the last faces that these groups of (mostly unsuspecting)
people would see. While lining them up, shaving their heads, and sending them down the “Road
to Heaven,” they were to inform the newcomers: “This is a work camp. The food is good and the
work easy. There’s nothing to worry about.”50 Often, that would be the last words uttered before
the chamber doors closed and a canister of Zyklon B was dropped in from the ceiling.
By 1943, the desire for co-ordinated vengeance and escape had been fomenting among work-
ers at Sobibór for some time, and many connections were formed based on mutual desires for
revolt. While renegade escapes had been attempted, few succeeded, and the toll of collective
punishment was vast. No one had conceived of a plan that could overthrow the camp or al-
low for mass escape, until September when a transport arrived and brought into the camp sev-
eral Russian-Jewish workers who had both military and partisan experience. The small network
of camp conspirators quickly developed contacts with one of the Russians, Aleksander “Sasha”
Pecherskii, whose recalcitrant attitude and strategic mind earned him a great deal of respect and
leadership among the rebels.51 Sasha agreed to offer leadership to the rebels, and after several
highly secretive meetings between fewer than a dozen conspirators, a plan was set in motion to
liberate all six hundred prisoners. After at least one delay due to unpredictable conditions, the
revolt was initiated on October 14, 1943. The first phase of the plan, which was relatively success-
ful, was to lure key German officers into private settings and discreetly kill them. Upon entering
the room where the “shoe fitting” or “valuable leather jacket” was promised, the guard would
be attacked with hand-made axes and knives while others worked nearby to cover the sound
of screams. Eleven of Sobibór’s top functionaries were killed in this way between 3:30 and 5:00

48
Rashke vii
49
Rashke 61, 62, 146, 98
50
Rashke 59
51
Rashke 162; Langbein 296. Sasha’s first week at the camp gave rise to legends. During this week he led his
fellow POWs in a sing-along of a popular Russian resistance song, poured his ration of soup onto the ground to display
his horror at watching the callous beating of the cook during its preparation, miraculously chopped through a tree
in less than two minutes as part of a life-or-death challenge from a Ukrainian guard, and then refused the pack of
cigarettes the guard offered him as a prize. Any one of these defiant acts was of course grounds for execution in the
camp (Rashke 162–4).

44
pm, and their weapons taken into rebel hands.52 During that time, an inmate with knowledge
of electrical systems was able to disconnect the lights and telephones to the whole camp.53 The
second part of the plan required all inmates to assemble for the afternoon roll call, gather into
marching formation, and simply walk out of the front gate with a sympathetic Capo at their helm.
The idea was that without the commanders around to give orders, a moment of confusion would
allow the inmates to get far enough past the gate so as to scramble into the nearby forests and
avoid the minefields all around the camp. The roll call was initiated early, piquing the suspicions
of some guards. The plan quickly fell apart, and what ensued was a murderous chaos.
Ukrainian guards fired from towers with heavy machine guns, while the pistols that rebels had
appropriated earlier in the day meekly fired back. Some inmates set fires around the buildings
hoping to burn the camp to the ground, while others rushed towards the camp armory to find
more weapons.54 Within minutes, the inmates were massively overpowered and frantic escape
became the only thinkable option. Inmates rushed to climb, cut, or collapse the barbed wire
fence (many died tangled there) and flee across the heavily-mined field towards the forest. Those
who survived this mad dash did so only because a path had been cleared of mines by those who
ran before them. Upon reaching the forest, the rebels faced a host of other challenges including
starvation and being ratted out by local farmers. Jewish partisan groups represented an ideal
opportunity to continue the battle against the Nazis, while those who stumbled into the midst of
Polish partisan groups report being robbed and shot at.55
Of the roughly 650 inmates in the camp on the day of the revolt, about 365 tried to escape; those
who remained in the camp were killed in the days after. Of those who attempted to escape, 185
were killed by gunfire or landmines. Within ten days, an additional 107 had been recaptured and
killed. Of the remaining one hundred at large, another twenty three were killed by non-Germans
before the war ended, and several others died of illness.56 Between forty and sixty participants in
the uprising survived the war, which along with four others who had escaped earlier, are the only
known survivors of Sobibór.57 On the whole, this is considered the “greatest success of inmates
in open resistance,” both in terms of the number of guards killed and the number of successful
escapees.58 It also brought an end to the mass extermination at Sobibór, as days later the SS
demolished the buildings, cleaned the site, and planted over the whole area with pine trees.

The Treblinka Uprising

The fiery glow that poured forth over Treblinka that night had a different color, a differ-
ent origin, and a different interpretation than the one of all previous nights. —Richard
Glazar

A similar insurrection was launched by the workers of Treblinka, another extermination camp
located only several hours north of Sobibór on the Eastern edge of Poland. A gruesome glimpse
52
Bialowitz 113–115; Langbein 298
53
Rashke 298
54
At least one account states that the inmates were able to clear out the armory (Langbein 70), while other seems
to indicate that the armory was never reached (Bialowitz).
55
Bialowitz 140
56
Bialowitz 194
57
Bialowitz 194; Langbein 300
58
Langbein 70

45
of life inside this camp is offered by the memoir of Chil Raichman, who spent nearly a year as
a worker in Treblinka before participating in the revolt. His book reads like a strobe-lit horror
show: a series of surreal, nightmarish images separated only by the frenzied whips and shouts
of SS and Ukrainian guards (whom he simply refers to as “murderers”). His first job in the camp
is as a barber, chopping the hair off of naked women before they are packed like sardines into
the gas chamber; throughout his frenzied workdays he is unable to respond to their desperate
questions as he is constantly under the supervision of a whip that cracks his spine if he speaks or
takes more than five snips to finish a job.59 After weeks in this role he is transferred to the other
side of the camp, where he is put to work wrenching bloated bodies out of the chambers, loading
them two at a time onto thin pallets, and dragging them to open pit graves. He is then assigned
work as a dentist, prying open the mouth of each corpse to extract any valuable metals, filling
suitcase after suitcase with human teeth. In between these jobs he sorts victims’ clothes, hauls
sand into the pits, and in the final months of the camp is put to work unearthing and burning all
of the corpses they had been working so hard to bury.60
To report illness in Treblinka is to be tortured and shot, to display an open wound is a death
sentence, and to go to the bathroom requires being mercifully granted a number by a guard and
then reporting to the “Toilet Supervisor” who is dressed like a clown and made to whip anyone
who sits longer than two minutes.61 Needless to say, the opportunities for resistance in this
horrific situation are nil.
Though in the first year of Treblinka’s operation a worker couldn’t expect to live more than
one or two weeks, eventually the Nazis’ need for productivity trumped their callous disregard
for life and workers were preserved for longer periods — this presented new opportunities to
resist.62 Whispers about an uprising spread, and eventually a conspiracy involving upwards of
sixty members (organized into several cells) developed.63 Those responsible for recovering valu-
ables from the victims slowly started to stockpile money, while others worked on acquiring arms
through theft or bribery of corrupt Ukrainian guards.64 The search for weapons seemed futile,
until a fourteen year old named Edek put a sliver of metal into the lock of the camp armory;
when the lock was taken to be fixed, the Jewish locksmith was able to make an impression and a
copy of the key.65 This access to arms, alongside the morale boost offered by meeting some of the
survivors of the Warsaw ghetto uprising (who were being shipped to Treblinka), turned revolt
into a real possibility. Several dates were considered for an attack, but unpredictable conditions
59
Raichman reports witnessing the defiant last stand of one teenager in the hair-cutting chamber, who upon
seeing all of the naked women crying, implored them to stop going to their deaths as cowards, and to instead laugh in
the faces of their murderers. “All stand as if frozen to the spot. The murderers look around. They become even wilder
and the girl laughs in their faces until she leaves,” (Raichman 34).
60
Much to the Nazis’ dismay, the blood had seeped its way up past the layers of ash and sand, and so bet-
ter methods of hiding their deeds needed to be found. After the camp guards failed to devise a way to adequately
burn thousands of corpses per day, the SS called in a specialist nicknamed “The Artist” who taught them the proper
methodology and supervised the construction of enormous ovens (Raichman 85–86).
61
Raichman 112, 56, 121. To add to the insanity of Treblinka, the camp even housed a zoo where wild bears and
foxes from the surrounding forests were caged for the entertainment of the guards.
62
Langbein 290
63
Langbein 291
64
Julian Chorazycki, one of the original organizers of the revolt, had managed to secure purchase of weapons
from a corrupt Ukrainian guard, but when an SS officer spotted the stack of money in his pocket Chorazycki used a
cover story to protect his conspirators and attacked the officer with a hospital dissecting knife. (Langbein 290)
65
Langbein 291

46
continuously led to postponements, and the more senior organizers had a “hard time persuading
young fellow conspirators to be patient.”66 As transports started to slow, and rumors of impend-
ing liquidation spread, a date was finally picked. One of the organizers summarized the plan
as such: “First catch and finish off the chief slavedrivers; disarm the guards, cut the telephone
connections; burn and destroy all the equipment of the death factories so they cannot be made
operational anymore; liberate the penal camp for Poles two kilometers away, join forces with
them and make our way into the forests to form a strong partisan group there.67
On the morning of August 2, 1943, the workers in Treblinka prepared themselves: those who
worked in the SS huts were rummaging through belongings looking for weapons and smuggling
them back to the garage under cover of a garbage collection. Jacek, another fourteen year old
rebel, used the prized key to slip into the armory where he quietly cut a hole in the rear window
and began passing weapons out to be added to the garbage collection. On the other side of the
camp, a worker tasked with cleaning buildings secretly replaced his disinfectant with gasoline.
Similar to each of the other camp uprisings, the plan in Treblinka was initiated prematurely,
meaning that not everyone had received weapons, nor had the telephone lines been cut. After
a signal shot was fired, grenades and bullets began hailing down onto the unsuspecting guards,
while Molotov cocktails engulfed the barracks in flames and prisoners rushed the fence. Esti-
mates of the number of escapees range from 150 to 600, while the death toll of SS and Ukrainian
guards ranges from zero to 200.68 As in Sobibór, successful escape meant the beginning of a new,
even more dangerous mission: to survive the hostile countryside. In the end, 52 of the rebels
lived to see the end of the war and tell the world about Treblinka.

Anarcho-Nihilism and Informal Organizing

An informal anarchist organization flows like water and takes new forms according to
the action it wants to carry out. —Conspiracy of Cells of Fire, Imprisoned Members
Cell

Because of the unique conditions of the extermination camps, long-term, formal organizations
were an impossibility. What arose instead were informal conspiracies of inmates that had one
shared ambition: insurrection. What they accomplished was nothing short of miraculous: the
two most successful uprisings to occur in Nazi camps and the liberation of some of the only
eye witnesses to the horrors of extermination camps. They did this without political allegiances,
without bureaucracy, and without deferring to history’s fabled “ripe conditions.”69 Although
the conspiracies that formed in Sobibór and Treblinka don’t necessarily reflect any sort of ‘ideal
nihilist model’, they do resonate with the approach that anarcho-nihilists have taken toward or-
ganizing outside of conventional structures. Such organizations as the Conspiracy of Cells of Fire
(CCF), the Informal Anarchist Federation (FAI), Wild Reaction (RS), and Individualists Tending
Toward the Wild (ITS)70 have played a significant role in the emergence of anarcho-nihilism as a
66
Langbein 291
67
Langbein 292
68
Langbein 294
69
Once again, a great deal of patience was required to strike at the right moment. The difference between deferral
and patience rests on one’s proven commitment to action.
70
ITS do not explicitly identify as nihilists, but certainly have a nihilistic bent.

47
widespread tendency, particularly in Europe, South America, and Mexico.71 Although this text
will not be offering any sweeping histories or critiques of these groups, I will attempt to use their
words to briefly explore how it is that anarcho-nihilists have set about to organize themselves.
The CCF emerged in 2008 from a minority incendiary tendency in Greece: anarchists who
were interested in autonomously attacking symbols of power but were dissatisfied with the lack
of strategy, coherence, development, and perspectives that this level of improvisation and dis-
organization offered.72 Without some degree of cohesion, they found, the incendiary tendency
“risks fading into the randomness of events and limiting itself to occasional upsurges that lack
planning and perspective.”73 This perennial observation has led many group-weary radicals to
rethink the concept of organizing. In one of their later communiques, the CCF reflects on this
process in their own formation:

As anarchists, we often distance ourselves from the concept of organization because

we equate it with hierarchy, roles, specialization, ‘you must,’ and obligations. How-
ever, words acquire the meanings given by the people who use them. As the Con-
spiracy of Cells of Fire, we stormed into battle over the meaning of revolutionary
anarchist organization.74

To combat a lack of momentum and visibility in their tactics, they took a new approach to
organization and began launching attacks under the banner of the CCF, a network of informally
organized cells that could conspire together and act with complete autonomy. From the begin-
ning, the CCF placed a high priority on communiques as a way to collectively develop ideas and
maintain momentum. Their initial wave of attacks on January 21, 2008 involved twelve bombings
and arsons targeted against banks, car dealerships, and a state-run power company. A month
later, fifteen more attacks followed (including an arson attack on the Associate Justice Minister’s
office), which consolidated their presence as a “stable and coherent collective that promotes the
destruction of power and society.”75 In 2011, the CCF effectively merged with the FAI, an “in-
formal anarchist structure based on revolutionary solidarity and direct action,” that had been
working under a similar model since the early 2000s.76 By that point, the FAI had hundreds of
actions affiliated with its name, including the bombings of several European Union buildings, a
police headquarters in Genoa, and a courthouse in Rome. Once again, communiques from each
of these actions have served as a central medium for the exchange and development of ideas
within the nihilist tendency.
The ITS, which emerged in Mexico in 2011 with a bombing targeted at a university’s nanotech-
nology department, approached organizing in a similar fashion: without “leaders nor commands,”
ensuring that “the cells enjoy total autonomy in the attack.”77 So vitriolic were the ITS against
leftist organizations that in 2011 they sent an incendiary package (i.e. letter-bomb) to a Mexican
71
Actualizing Collapse
72
A Conversation Between Anarchists 4
73
A Conversation Between Anarchists 5. A similar observation is made by the Invisible Committee, who write:
“Organizing is acting in accordance with a common perception… without this binding agent, gestures dissolve without
a trace into nothingness, lives have the texture of dreams, and uprisings end up in school-books,” (To our friends 17).
74
Sun Still Rises 1
75
Sim Still Rises 10
76
325: An Insurgent Zine of Social War and Anarchy 23
77
The Collected Communiques of Individualists Tending Toward the Wild 25

48
Greenpeace office, declaring war against those who “only seek to reform the system and create
alternatives”; who wage “hypocritical campaigns in ‘favor’ of the environment in order to gain
public notoriety”; and who posture as being oppositional even though “everything that they de-
fend is invested in the system.”78 In contrast to the leftist approach, ITS insisted that “the best
option to slip away from the system continues to be informal organization, meeting as individ-
uals in affinity or alone, betting on insurrectionalist immediatism and the quality of sabotage,
[and] rejecting formal organization.”79 The ITS merged with a new organization in 2014 called
RS, which maintained this informal approach: “RS does NOT have leaders or a fixed and absolute
leader, we are NOT an army or Marxist guerrilla group, RS is composed of groups of individuals
responsible for our own actions, who act according to their possibilities.”80 Without bureaucracy,
without imposed uniformity, and without appeals to public legibility, these informal organiza-
tions have inspired incendiary attacks and networks of solidarity around the world.
One of the aspects of anarcho-nihilism that makes this kind of informal organizing possible
is the tactical freedom afforded by its rejection of all inherited programs, moralities, and expec-
tations. It urges us to take ethical decisions into our own hands rather than appealing to any
socially governed notions of right and wrong, thus opening up an infinite spectrum of tactical
thinking that can more meaningfully interact with the particularities of our unique context.81
Experimentation, then, takes the place of formulaic thinking in revolutionary struggle: “Rather
than organization, then, in the present we might simply speak of experimentation, as the willing-
ness of small groups of people to gamble on these admittedly slim possibilities with absolutely
no guarantee of success.”82 What we hope to find when we open up our field of vision like this is
that anarchistic organizing doesn’t have to be a soul-sucking, bureaucratic affair; on the contrary,
we might find that “we can organize ourselves, and that this capacity is fundamentally joyful.”83
An informal organization like the CCF or RS allows space for individuals and affinity groups to
act with unrestrained ferocity against systems of domination, while still being connected to a
network of people who are interested in similar ideas and who can act in solidarity with each
others’ struggles.
The groups that emerged in Treblinka and Sobibór were able to act with the sort of fluidity and
tactical freedom that the Sonderkommando nearly surrendered in the presence of a formal, com-
munist organization. Like the members of the FAI or the ITS, their unity as a group came solely
from their joint willingness to attack the existing order. Though there is a great deal of nuance
and complexity that should not be overlooked, the fact remains that the two most successful up-
risings to occur in Nazi concentration camps happened in two of the only camps without formal
organizations. This in itself should challenge anarchists and other radicals to deeply question
the pragmatic function of organizations in our lives. While formal and sustained organizational
methods can be useful for certain goals, we should remember that they are often structurally in-
capable of working towards moments of complete rupture. What they offer in terms of resources,

78
Ibid 71. In light of much criticism, ITS later reconsidered this war on leftist organizations and opted instead
for a policy of simply ignoring them, while focusing attacks exclusively on the “Techno-industrial System.”
79
Ibid 25
80
Actualizing Collapse 21. I have just learned that RS has declared itself morte as of August 2015, and has divided
into several smaller informal organizations, some anonymous, others of which will make their names known soon.
81
Anarchy and Nihilism: Consequences
82
“Hic Nihil Hic Salta!”
83
The Invisible Committee 219

49
visibility, and longevity, must be measured against the hurdles they often create between people
and their insurrectionary desires. That being said, while the informal organizational methods
being experimented with by nihilists are exciting and have clearly facilitated a great deal of in-
cendiary action, they also carry with them inevitable shortcomings and pitfalls, not least of which
is the sort of solipsism that results in a Greenpeace office getting bombed. And though informal
organizational models may be able to mitigate the problem of collective responsibility, they will
never be able to fully solve the problem. Just as the authors of Attentat become paralyzed by
the “horror show” that would be required to violently confront the state, so too did the Fighting
Group Auschwitz and other concentration camp organizations attempt to navigate the tension
between attacking a dominant order and the responses this would provoke. Ultimately somebody
along the line is going to have to make shady ethical choices, regardless of organizational model.
Thus, while I think that stories of concentration camp uprisings can help us to develop a healthy
wariness around the role of organizations, we must also stay vigilant to nuance. There are no
easy answers to these questions. Without dismissing (or attacking) every formal organization
we encounter, we can continue to experiment with non-hierarchical organizational forms that
might facilitate, rather than defer, moments of liberatory rupture.

50
Reflections
Cruel Optimisms
The Machine has fabricated a landscape in which even at the depths of suffering it is less
unpleasant to choose among the officially proffered options than to resist, to transgress,
to fight back, to step out of line. The lessons of the Holocaust were well learned. We
will walk through the very last door as long as it is the easiest of a well managed set of
choices. —Lev Zlodey & Jason Radegas

The ghetto was ruled by neither German nor Jew; it was ruled by delusion —Elie Wiesel

In her book Cruel Optimism, Lauren Berlant dissects some of the reasons that human beings
cling so tenaciously to hopeful ideas. She defines “cruel optimism” as “a relation of attachment
to compromised conditions of possibility whose realization is discovered either to be impossible,
sheer fantasy, or too possible, and toxic.”1 What makes these attachments cruel is not just the
harmful impact of the object of desire, but the sense in which the object comes to provide some-
thing of “the continuity of the subject’s sense of what it means to keep on living on and to look
forward to being in the world.”2 Without the object of our desire, we fall apart. Underneath of a
cruel optimism is an existential abyss, and yet severing ourselves from it poses the only real pos-
sibility for growth. As Berlant writes: “Why do people stay attached to conventional good-life
fantasies — say, of the enduring reciprocity in couples, families, political systems, institutions,
markets, and at work — when the evidence of their instability, fragility, and dear cost abounds?”3
In the Nazi camps, these cruel optimisms had a name: paroles, which referred to optimistic ru-
mours that spread through the camps, usually about the war nearing an end or the partisans
nearing the camp walls.4 The false sense of hope that such rumours offered was both a lifeline
for desperate people, and a perpetual deterrent for resistance. What cruel optimisms might we
be clinging to in our current situations?
Anarchism is fundamentally posed to challenge many cruel optimisms held by society, and
anarchism is in turn having its own cruel optimisms challenged by nihilism. Nihilism is the
incredulous voice whispering impossible questions: Are we toxically attached to the idea that
we can build a new world in the shell of the old, despite overwhelming evidence that points
towards the impossibility of that happening? Are we stuck in a model of time that binds us to
the reproduction of society and endlessly defers incendiary action? Have we inherited a set of
stagnant revolutionary models that serve only to limit the full spectrum of tactics available to
us and to manage the rebellious desires that course through our bodies? Is all of our resistance
predicated on the fantasy that we can actually bring an end to global capitalism?
1
Berlant 24
2
Ibid
3
Ibid 2
4
Garlinski 70

51
 For those in the Lagers, the dissolution of cruel optimisms was the most crucial step towards
resistance. Immersed in a fog of misinformation, insidious lies, and unbearable truths, very few
inmates managed to come to terms with the severity of their situations, and even fewer were
able to muster the will (or had the luck/privilege/physical ability, etc) to act on those truths.
Nihilism is the voice at the Warsaw Ghetto train station whispering, these trains are bound for an
extermination center; it is the voice on the “Road to Freedom” whispering, these aren’t showers;
it is the voice in the Lagers definitively proclaiming, “no one is going to save us”.5 Some of the
truths that nihilism asks us to confront are almost as severe and unbelievable as the truth about
the camps. Groups like the CCF and the FAI ask us to accept the possibility that the majority
of human beings on this planet will never be motivated to resist oppression. The zine Desert6
asks us to accept that global climate change is unstoppable, and that, despite our best efforts,
it will not result in the end of capitalism, patriarchy, or civilization as a whole. The authors of
Attentat confront the grotesque possibility that meaningful social change is actually impossible
in the current landscape, and that action is not even necessarily justified:

Anything less complex than the spectacular, cybernetic, late capitalism of this world
is hopelessly naive and simplistic. It would necessitate untold violence and brutality.
It would tear asunder the illusions of two hundred years of humanistic, rights-based
social organization… Practically, we don’t live in an era where utopian or even liberal
(in the broadest sense of the word) political change is possible.7

These are all grotesque ideas in that they force us to confront a situation without hope. The
problem for many of us is that these ideas happen to resonate on a very deep level. We just don’t
always know what to do with them.
Though we are certainly not obliged to accept every nihilist position that comes out of the
woodwork (many of which are overly simplistic and loaded with brawny machismo), some of
them are just impossible to ignore. Others, such as the idea that we should turn our backs on
the positivist projects that sustain us and give us joy, can be wrestled with and taken for what
they’re worth — perhaps a willingness to be honest about the limits of such projects. In other
words, this isn’t about becoming a nihilist. Nihilism does not demand our allegiance, because it
is not a political ideology. I am more inclined to look at it as a tendency in the true sense of the
word, and to embrace it as a fluid presence in our lives that constantly asks us to negate our own
ideologies, certainties, and optimistic attachments. I find any form of nihilism that gets used as
an excuse not to dream, not to act, and not to engage earnestly with other people to be dull — I
am interested in a nihilism that ravenously digs below the surface of commonly accepted ideas,
and that can help us to ground our resistance in something more meaningful than tired slogans
and listless strategies. I am interested in a nihilism that helps us to reorient our lives away from
cruel optimisms and towards jouissance.

5
As Sasha did for the inmates of Sobibór when they asked about the possibility of being rescued by partisans
(Rashke 171)
6
Once again, not explicitly nihilist, but certainly written with a nihilistic critique.
7
Attentat 149, 152

52
Insurrectionary Memories
To remember the struggle in the present is to glimpse which road we have walked upon,
to help understand where to place our next steps — this is to use insurrectionary memory
to replant ourselves tactically and strategically in combat against the oppressive reality.
—Anonymous Chilean Anarchists

Reading holocaust literature is not easy work and I don’t blame people for turning away from
it. Nearly every page of memoir brings with it a new layer of hellish imagery, trauma, and
misanthropic insight. I felt called to these stories for a number of personal reasons, and was
motivated to keep reading when I started to glimpse the ways that they might be interesting to
other anarchists. My experience of these stories became even richer when I started to realize
that one of the most widespread and crushing fears for those who entered the camps was of
not having their stories heard, of being forgotten by history. Primo Levi observed that the most
commonly reported nightmare in the Lagers was not one of death or torture, but the alienation
of clogged mouths and muted words. “Why,” he asked, “is the pain of every day translated so
constantly into our dreams in the ever-repeated scene of the unlistened-to story?”8 With this in
mind, reading diaries and memoirs becomes less of a dry historical excavation, and more of an
interaction with those who staked their last shreds of energy on the hopes that they would not
be forgotten. Because the Nazis worked so vigilantly to erase the Ballastexistenzen from history,
to forget them would be “akin to killing them a second time.”9
In remembering these voices, we also have the opportunity to carry on past struggles and to
turn the stories of those who came before us into fodder against our oppressors. As we all know,
history is written by the victors, and so the narratives of Progress and Great Men offered to us by
society generally serve only to reinforce power. Benjamin warned that “even the dead will not be
safe from the enemy if he wins” and that “this enemy has not ceased to be victorious”.10 The fact
that the Nazi holocaust has been consistently wielded to justify the murder and oppression of
the Palestinian people epitomizes how the dead can be reanimated to perpetuate cycles of domi-
nation. Similarly, looking at all the ways that historical revisionism has been used (occasionally
by anarchists) to minimize the holocaust and perpetuate anti-semitism in the form of conspiracy
theories reminds us that we simply don’t have the option of letting history rest in its grave. By
engaging ourselves in this project called “history”, we can find ways to turn past struggles against
current forms of domination and to “ensure that the memory of the dead continues to haunt the
living.”11 I see this happening all around me with People’s History posters and Silvia Federici
reading groups, with land acknowledgments and Haymarket handbills. History does not need
to be neutral, but rather can fly in the face of domination and help to sharpen and expand our
conflicts against the powerful.12 As our Chilean friends have declared: “Insurrectionary memory
is our weapon!”13 It is my hope that this text can contribute to this ever-expanding arsenal.
It is worth noting here that not all history speaks loudly enough for us to easily hear it. How
many stories of concentration camp resistance have been lost? Because of the sheer brutality of
8
Levi 60
9
Wiesel xv
10
Benjamin 255
11
You Can’t Shoot Us All
12
Bæden Vol. I 104
13
Bæden Vol. I 105

53
the Nazi regime and the conditions of isolation in which much of this history unfolded, it is safe
to assume that most acts of resistance were captured only in the fleeting wisps of gun smoke
that silenced fast-beating, recalcitrant hearts. In so many ways, our willingness to attend to the
silences of history may determine our ability to understand this world and how we got to where
we are.

The Void
The active nihilist sees in the unknown future and despair at our current situation, a call
to arms. Meaning is found in approaching the void rather than in the false knowledge
of what is on the other side of it. —Attentat

We are nihilists regardless of whether we call ourselves by the name, because we have
no road out of this. We have only the starlit wilderness… The first act of navigation is
to set foot in the wilderness. Only then can we put our hands against the bare earth,
feeling for the dim warmth of those fires still smoldering beneath. —“Hic Nihil, Hic
Salta! (A Critique of Bartlebyism)”

With every rebellious footstep we take, we are entering an unknowable void. There are no
reliable maps of the terrain that our struggles will occupy. No one has a leg up on the question of
liberation. So much has been tried and so much has failed, let us finally admit that we don’t know
what is “right” or what will “work”.14 Nobody knows how, why, or if a dominant order will fall.
We don’t know if there are enough letterbombs in the world to bring an end to nuclear power,
nor do we know if a well-timed mass uprising in Auschwitz would have actually succeeded in
shutting down the camp. Despite what anyone tells us, there is no guarantee that the workers
of the world are going to rise up, nor any assurances that such a thing would even lead to a
desirable situation.
Though we have inherited a great many ideas about how to confront domination, we know
that nothing is set in stone. From the shattered tools and bones of our predecessors, we craft our
own weapons. Nothing is guaranteed to work, yet we attack regardless. We do so naked, having
shed the rags of morality, ideology, and politics that had accumulated over time. We confront
this world raw, in all its horrifying glory. We negate every truth and rule and we proceed with
a spirit of incendiary experimentation. We dream big, expect little, and celebrate every moment
of rupture. We take every opportunity to ensure that those in power lose sleep and that their
functionaries have miserable jobs. We set our lives to ripping up the geraniums that line the
extermination camp paths, pissing in the gears of society’s machinery, and when all else fails, we
will follow in the footsteps of those who spent their final minutes in the gas chambers singing
and fucking.15
May jouissance be the blessed flame that guides us into the void.

14
Venona Q 28
15
Müller 151

54
Glossary
AK: The Polish Home Army, a resistance army fighting Nazi occupation.
Ballastexistenzen: Hitler’s preferred term for the “undesirable and unnecessary” members
of society.
Capo: A prisoner appointed by the Nazis to be the head of a labour crew.
CCF: Conspiracy of Cells of Fire, an informal organization started in 2008 in Greece.
FAI: Informal Anarchist Federation, an informal anarchist organization birthed in 2003 in Italy.
Futurity: the impression that one has a future within the existing order.
Greens: German prisoners in the concentration camps, often given functionary positions with
the camp (e.g. Capo, Senior Camp Inmate, etc.), named for the green badges they were made to
wear.
Häftling: A prisoner in the Nazi concentration camp; plural — Häftlinge.
ITS: Individualists Tending Toward The Wild, an informal organization started in Mexico in
2011.
Kommando: A labour crew.
Lager: A Nazi concentration camp (German word meaning “camp” or “storehouse”).
RS: Reaccion Salvaje/Wild Reaction, an informal organization started in 2014 in Mexico.
Recalcitrance: resisting authority or control; not obedient; hard to manage.
Reds: Political prisoners in the concentration camps, named for the red badges they were
made to wear.
Reproductive Futurity: The belief that the existing order is the safest future for children in
the abstract, and that sacrifices are to be made in the name of this abstract Child.
SS: Schutzstaffel, a paramilitary organization under Adolf Hitler that was responsible for run-
ning the concentration camps.
Sonderkommando: A work detail of (mostly Jewish) camp inmates tasked with operating
the gas chambers, crematorium, and other processes of extermination in the camps.
ZOW: The Zwiazek Organizacji Wojskowej, a Polish underground resistance organization in
Auschwitz, started by Witold Pilecki.

55
Afterthoughts
In writing an overview of both anarcho-nihilist thought and concentration camp resistance, I
have omitted much. The nihilist themes of negation, time, and organization could have happily
been joined by conversations about identity abolishment, queerness, domestication, and more.
Stories of Häftlinge who lashed back against the camp systems could have been elaborated by
countless stories of escape, mutual aid, and nonviolent civil disobedience, all of which played a
part in the broader story of resistance in the Lagers. There are many questions and topics that
still remain unexplored for me.
The experience of gender and genderlessness in the camps is a particularly amazing topic that
I’d like to think more about, and that might contrast well with anarchist rhetoric about gender
abolition. Primo Levi remembers how disturbing it was to work next to female prisoners who
had lost all outwards demarcations of femininity, and also how demoralizing and shameful it
was for him to be put to work in a German laboratory where he, in his genderless state, was
forced to work alongside outwardly presenting German women.1 What insights about gender
and the desire to abolish it can we take from his and other experiences of the violent eradication
of gender within the camps?
The topic of Nazis and ecological destruction is also one that I feel intrigued by. The Nazis,
and particularly Himmler, had an obsession with rendering wild spaces into agricultural utopias,
which meant that many camp inmates were put to work doing broadscale landscape architecture.
Auschwitz itself was right at the junction of two major rivers, a well-known flood plain that
required an enormous amount of destructive landscaping to make hospitable for the camp. Filip
Müller notes that much of this water became grossly contaminated by a “black, evil-smelling
ooze” that seeped up from mass burial sites during hot summer months. The Nazis’ relationship
to nature is particularly interesting considering news from the Hambach Forest where a small
group of land defenders are working to protect some of Germany’s last old-growth forests against
the largest, most sinister earth-eating machines in the world. I’ve been recently informed that
whole villages around the mining site are being evicted under Nazi-era laws.
Lastly, I am very curious to know of the experiences of anarchists in the camps — I know they
were there, I just haven’t been able to find any. If anyone knows of any memoirs or books that
reference specific anarchist Häftlinge, I would greatly appreciate the heads up.

1
Levi 142

56
Bibliography

325: An Insurgent Zine of Social War and Anarchy. October 2011: Zine 9. Retrieved online from
325.nostate.net
Agamben, Giorgio. Homo Sacer: Sovereign Power and Bare Life. Stanford University Press, 1998:
Stanford.
Anarchist Federation In Italy. “Anarchist Federation statement on kneecapping of nuclear exec-
utive by Informal Anarchist Federation”. Libcom.org. 20 May 2012. Web.
Anonymous. Actualising Collapse. Retrieved online from interarma.info
Anonymous. Attentat. Pistols Drawn, 2013.
Anonymous. Bæden: Journal of Queer Nihilism. Vol. I. Seattle, 2012.
Anonymous. Bæden: Journal of Queer Heresy. Vol. II. Seattle, 2014.
Anonymous. Desert.
Anonymous. Do Or Die: Insurrectionary Anarchy — Organizing for Attack! Issue #10. Retrieved
online from theanarchistlibrary.org
Anonymous. Uncontrollable: Contributions Towards a Conscious Nihilism. May 2011. Retrieved
online from theanarchistlibrary.org
Anonymous. You Can’t Shoot Us All: On The Oscar Grant Rebellions. Retrieved online from
bayofrage.com
Arad, Yitzhak, Yisrael Gutman, Abraham Margaliot, eds. Documents on the Holocaust. KTAV
Publishing House: New York.
Aragorn! Anarchy and Nihilism: Consequences. Retrieved online from theanarchistlibrary.org
Aragorn! Nihlism, Anarchy and the 21st Century. Retrieved online from theanarchistlibrary.org
Arendt, Hannah. Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil. Penguin Books, 2006:
New York.
Bauer, Yehuda. Rethinking The Holocaust. Yale University Press, 2001: New Haven and London.
Benjamin, Walter. Illuminations. Schocken Books, 1968: New York.
Berlant, Lauren. Cruel Optimism. Duke University Press, 2011: Durham and London.
Bialowitz, Philip, with Joseph Bialowitz. A Promise at Sobibór. University of Wisconsin Press,
2010: Madison.
Churchill, Ward. Indians Are Us?: Culture and Genocide in Native North America. Between The
Lines, 1994: Toronto.
Conspiracy of Cells of Fire. The Sun Still Rises. Untorelli Press, 2015.
Conspiracy of Cells of Fire (Imprisoned Members Cell). Communization: The Senile Decay of
Anarchy. Untorelli Press, 201 5.
Conspiracy of Cells of Fire (Imprisoned Members Cell) & Mexican Anarchists. A Conversation
Between Anarchists. Untorelli Press, 2015.
Conspiracy of Cells of Fire/FAI. “In Cold Blood”. Dark Nights. Issue 42. 2015. Retrieved online
from 325.nostate.net

57
Dark Mountain. “The Dark Mountain Manifesto”. Black Seed: A Green Anarchist Journal. Fall
2014: Issue 2.
De Acosta, Alejandro. Its Core is the Negation. Spring 2013. Retrieved online from theanarchistli-
brary.org
DEGOB: National Committee for Attending Deportees. Online Database of Protocols (Oral Testi-
monies). Web. Aug. 2015.
Donat, Alexander. Jewish Resistance. Warsaw Ghetto Resistance Organization (WARGO), 2964:
New York.
Dunn-Wasowicz, Krzysztof. Resistance in the Nazi Concentration Camps 1933–1945. Polish Scien-
tific Publishers, 1982: Warsaw.
Edelman, Marek. The Ghetto Fights. Bookmarks, 1990: London.
Garlinski, Józef. Fighting Auschwitz: The Resistance Movement in the Concentration Camp.
Fontana/Collins, 1978: Great Britain.
Garlinski, Józef. Fighting Auschwitz: The Resistance Movement in the Concentration Camp.
Fontana/Collins, 1978: Glasgow.
Glass, James M. Jewish Resistance During the Holocaust: Moral Uses of Violence and Will. Palgrave,
2004: New York.
Goldstein, Bernard. Five Years in the Warsaw Ghetto. Nabat/AK Press, 2005: California.
Gurewitsch, Brana. Ed. Mothers, Sisters, Resisters: Oral Histories of Women Who Survived the
Holocaust. University of Alabama Press, 1998: Tuscaloosa and London.
“Hic Nihil, Hic Salta! (A Critique of Bartlebyism).” Research and Destroy. 29 July 2015. Web.
Individualists Tending Toward The Wild. The Collected Communiques of Individualists Tending
Toward The Wild. 2013.
Informal Anarchist Federation. Escalation: Some Texts Concerning the Informal Anarchist Federa-
tion (FAI) and the Insurrectionist Project. Retrieved online from 325.nostate.net
Informal Anarchist Federation (Olga Cell). “Against the Corporations of Death”. Dark Nights.
Issue #19. May 2012. Retrieved online from 325.nostate.net
Jan van Pelt, Robert. “Resistance in the Camps.” Jewish Resistance Against The Nazis. Ed. Patrick
Henry. The Catholic University of America Press, 2014: Washington. 547–594.
Langbein, Hermann. Against All Hope: Resistance in the Nazi Concentration Camps 1938–1945.
Translated by Harry Zohn. Paragon House, 1994: New York.
Laska, Vera. Women in the Resistance and in the Holocaust. Greenwood Press, 1983: Westport.
Lengyel, Olga. I Survived Hitler’s Ovens (Five Chimneys). Avon Publications, 1947: New York.
Levi, Primo. Survival In Auschwitz. Touchstone, 1996: New York.
Levi, Primo. The Drowned and the Saved. Vintage, 1989: New York.
Levy-Hass, Hanna. Diary of Bergen-Belsen. Haymarket Books, 2009: Chicago.
Meers, Hilda. For The Hearing of the Tale, For The Future of the Wish: Resistance in Nazi Concen-
tration Camps. Country Books, 2002: Derbyshire.
Monsieur Dupont. Anarchists Must Say What Only Anarchists Can Say. 2003. Retrieved online
from theanarchistlibrary.org
Müller, Filip. Eyewitness Auschwitz. Ivan R Dee, 1999: Chicago.
“Nihilist Anarchism.” The Final Straw Radio. Ashevillefm.org. 21 July 2013. Web.
Pilecki, Captain Witold. The Auschwitz Volunteer: Beyond Bravery. Aquila Publishing, 2012: Los
Angeles.
“Prayer for Katerina Horovitz.” Vlak Lustig — Train Lustig. Web. Aug. 201 5

58
Price, Wayne. The Meaning of World War II — An Anarchist View. 2015. Retrieved online from
theanarchistlibrary.org.
Raichman, Chil. The Last Jew of Treblinka. Pegasus Books, 2011: New York.
Rashke, Richard. Escape From Sobibór. University of Illinois Press, 1995: Urbana and Chicago.
Rees, Laurence. Auschwitz: A New History. PublicAffairs, 2005: New York.
Rolling Thunder: A Journal Of Dangerous Living. “Biofilo Panclasta: Anecdotes”. Spring 2015:
Issue 12. Crimethinc. Ex-Workers’ Collective.
Saidel, Rochelle G. The Jewish Women of Ravensbrück Concentration Camp. University of Wiscon-
sin Press, 2004: Madison.
Tec, Nechama. Resistance: Jews and Christians Who Defied the Nazi Terror. Oxford University
Press, 2013: New York.
The Invisible Committee. To Our Friends. Translated by Robert Hurley. Semiotext(e),
20i4:California.
Venona Q. “Scandalous Thoughts: A Few Notes on Civil Anarchism”. Anarchy: Civil or Subver-
sive? Retrieved online from 325.notstate.net.
Wiesel, Elie. Night. Hill and Wang, 2006: New York.
Willenberg, Samuel. Revolt in Treblinka. Zydowski Instytut Historyczny, 2008: Tel Aviv.
Zlodey, Lev, and Jason Radegas. Here… at the Center of the World in Revolt. Little Black Cart
Books, 2014.

59
Acknowledgements
Thanks to my parents for your support, my mom for being such a solid research assistant, and
to Amber for helping me find space in my life to pursue this subject.
Big ups to Semo Distro for keeping me immersed in rad literature, and to The Armando Del
Moro Library for your patience with my overdue books.
This book is dedicated to my grandmother, whose tenacity and strength brought me into this
world, and who continues to inspire me daily.
And to all those living recalcitrant lives.
(And to K, for punching a Nazi in the face while I was busy writing this.)

60
 The Anarchist Library
Anti-Copyright

Serafinski
Blessed is the Flame
An introduction to concentration camp resistance and anarcho-nihilism
2016

Reworked doc file from the OCR pdf of Archive.org

Taken from the original book: Running heads, body and italics set in Sabon, an old-style
typeface designed by German typographer, suspected-communist and concentration camp
survivor Jan Tschichold. Headers are set in DIN 1451, the iconic authoritarian typeface of the
German state adopted during the Third Reich’s rein and still the face of German signage today.
Pistols Drawn 2016. Contact for the author: undertow(A)riseup.net

theanarchistlibrary.org