#pubdate 2014-09-20 06:45:50 +0000
#title The Communiques of Wild Reaction
#LISTtitle Communiques of Wild Reaction
#author Wild Reaction
#SORTauthors Wild Reaction, Chahta-Ima
#SORTtopics anti-civilization, anti-technology, civilization, technology, terrorism, eco-extremism, ecoterrorism, ITS, atassa
#source http://waronsociety.noblogs.org/ and https://regresando.altervista.org
#date 8 Sept 2014
#notes Reaccion Salvaje is a terror network that previously operated under the name Individualidades Tendiendo a lo Salvaje (ITS). To read the communiques of ITS, visit http://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/individualists-tending-toward-the-wild-communiques
#lang en

*** First Communique (14 August 2014 — Cuernavaca, Morelos)

<quote>
<em>“The people who are pushing all this garbage of development and technological progress should be severely punished.”</em>

- F. [1]
</quote>

After a little more than three years of criminal-terrorist activity, the group “Individualists Tending toward the Wild” (ITS), begins a new phase in this open war against the Technoindustrial System, which we explain below:

**** I

First of all, we want to explain that during all of 2012 and 2013, various groups of a terrorist and sabotage stripe were uniting themselves with the group ITS, so that now, after a long silence and for purely strategic reasons, we publicly claim:

 1. The “Informal Anti-civilization Group,” which on June 29, 2011, took responsibility for the explosion that severely damaged a Santander bank in the city of Tultitlan, Mexico.

 1. “Uncivilized Autonomous,” who on October 16, 2011 set off a bomb inside the ATMs of a Banamex, located between the cities of Tultitlan and Coacalco in Mexico State.

 1. “Informal Circle of Antagonistic Individualists,” who in September 2009 set several wild horses free from a farm in Aguascalientes.

 1. “Wild Indomitables,” who on October 16, 2011 left a butane gas bomb that did not detonate in a Santander bank in the Álvaro Obregón district of Mexico City. The act was never claimed until now.

 1. “Terrorist Cells for the Direct Attack – Anti-civilization Fraction,” which in 2010 and 2011 left a fake bomb in front of the IFaB (Pharmacological and Biopharmeceutical Research), and detonated an explosive outside the building of the National Ecology Institute (INE), both in the Tlalpan district of Mexico City.

 1. “Luddites against the Domestication of Wild Nature,” who during 2009 to 2011 had taken part in various incendiary attacks in some cities in Mexico State and various districts of Mexico City, claimed or unclaimed.

 1. “NS – Fera – Kamala y Amala” which on December 9, 2011, left an explosive package addressed to the director of the National Institute of Psychiatry “Ramón de la Fuente” in the Tlalpan district, Mexico City. It was deactivated by the police bomb squad. On the 15<sup>th</sup> of this month, the same group warned through email of the presence of a car bomb in the institution’s parking lot, which, although it was a false warning, created terror among the officials of that center of mental alienation.

 1. “Earth Liberation Front – Bajío”, which on November 16, 2011 set off an explosive charge creating damages within the ATM area of a branch of the Federal Electricity Commission (CFE) in the city of Irapuato in Guanajuato.

Likewise, during this year, 2014, two more terroristic groups have united with us who have put the development of the Technoindustrial System in their sights, we refer to:

 1. The “Obsidian Point Circle of Attack,” which at the end of March of this year sent a letter-bomb via express mail to the Rector of UNAM in Mexico City.

 1. The “Atlatl Group,” which in April of this year claimed responsibility for bomb threats and intimidating messages to academic institutions in Michoacán, Mexico State, Mexico City, Puebla and Zacatecas.

All of these have now fused with the ITS groups in Morelos, Mexico City, Guanajuato, Hidalgo, Coahuila and Veracruz.

Due to this union, the extravagant and little-practical pseudonym of “Individualists Tending toward the Wild” (ITS) ceases to exist, and from now on the attacks against technology and civilization will be signed with the new name of “Wild Reaction” (RS).

**** II

RS will take the initiative of attacking human targets as it was with ITS, but we will also charge against public and private property. The research centers will be burned along with their scientists, the businesses that promote artificiality along with their employees and executives will suffer attacks; in sum, everything that involves civilization, technology and progress will be fiercely attacked.

And if for that reason, during an attack, some citizen is wounded or killed, we won’t care, we will be indifferent and indiscriminating. The population, the mass, the people, the community, the sheep, the society does not merit our consideration, neither warnings, nor calls to attention, nor anything at all, because they are all part of the system; let it be clear, if they cross our path they are going to regret it… and we already showed this in the past with ITS. [2]

<quote>
<em>“Anything based on the masses, the herd, carries in itself the seeds of slavery. This crowd, which does not self-determine its values, is incapable of defining its own life.”</em>

- A.
</quote>

**** III

The groups that form RS will have their own names, this is just for inter-group decision.

These groups will enjoy autonomy, will be able to carry out acts of sabotage as well as terrorist ones, (if they want to), when they want, breaking with the “formalities of attack” and predestined group dates. That is, in any moment and any place, the latent threat of aggression will be present.

**** IV

We deny being followers of Ted Kaczynski (3); we have indeed learned many things from reading <em>Industrial Society and Its Future</em>, the texts after this and the letters before this text signed by “Freedom Club” (FC), but that does not mean that we are his followers. In fact our position clashes with Kaczynski’s, FC’s, his disciple Último Reducto and others, since we do not consider ourselves revolutionaries, we do not want to form an “anti-technological movement” that encourages the “total overthrow of the system,” we do not see it as viable, we do no want victory, we do not pretend to win or lose, this is an individual fight against the mega-machine; we don’t care about getting something positive from this, since we are simply guided by our instincts of defense and survival.

We are for the rejection of artificiality and of modern reality. We deny the values of the system such as “equality,” “promiscuous solidarity,” “peace,” “progress,” “plurality,” “humanism,” etc.

We defend our identity as “modern” humans clinging to our primitive past.

We cast our labels like “anti-civilization,” “primitivist,” “anarchist,” “anti-technology,” “luddite,” because RS is a unique tendency that does not need these tired and twisted labels for defining ourselves.

Thus neither Kaczynski, Último Reducto, Zerzan, Derrick Jensen, or any other with the (supposed) “primitivist” stamp represents RS.

Nor do the Informal Anarchist Federation (FAI), the Conspiracy of Cells of Fire (CCF), Feral Faun, or any other with the “eco-anarchist” or “anti-civilization cell of…” stamp.

RS and its groups only represent themselves.

<quote>
<em>“[This] is a way of expressing our ‘ego.’ An ‘ego’ that wants to differentiate itself from the herd of slaves, an ‘ego’ that does not bow its head, an ‘ego’ that does not wait for the masses to rebel, an ‘ego’ that vindicates its own name, its own ‘acronym’ and does not hide behind anonymity.”</em>

- C.
</quote>

**** V

Previously some (but not all) of the groups that have united as RS were exclusively formed by “eco-anarchists” and “radical ecologists,” now RS is formed by nihilist saboteurs, incendiary nomads, individualist delinquents, terrorist anarchists, politically and morally incorrect critics, that is, RS is a group of affinities who are ready for everything that is necessary, for achieving what we want… and what we want is the destabilization of the system, the direct punishment of those immediately responsible for the subjugation of wild nature (including human nature).

We are a considerable group of wild ones who are conscious that our ancestors were warriors and we vindicate ourselves in the same way. We are the minority of the minority, we have decided to undertake a war against everything that is taking away our essence as natural humans, and is fixing us to turn us into humiliated humanoids.

This essence that we cling to has been transmitted to us by our wild ancestors, it pushes us to follow the path of confrontation and resistance, against alienation, against what wants to domesticate us and keep us alienated from our true home: the forests, the deserts, the hills, the mountains, the jungles, the coasts.

The Technoindustrial System and its unimpeded advance snatched from us the way of living free that our great-great-grandfathers enjoyed; civilization with its agriculture and its sedentarism covered the environment in gray and deprived us of memory; modernity stunned our primitive instincts and senses; the animals we hunted died from the plague of technology; the places where wandered and rested were devastated by infrastructure and overpopulation; progress sunk us in ignorance; natural wisdom was lost in the passing of generations.

Day by day we drive ourselves to extinction, we are at the edge of the abyss, since we do not intend to adapt ourselves to the system nor to its submissive society, nor to its moral values.

But we have awoken! That primitive essence continues with us, it is not domesticated, it feels uncomfortable in the cities and it whispers constantly to us: “You do not belong here, destroy your cage.”

This is why during these years we have intensified the conflict against artificiality, this is why we have burned machines, set off explosives, created terror, torn living flesh, punctured heads, just as the ancients did in the wars against civilization, in defense of their way of life; that way of life still exists though it may be very minimal, and we will defend it to the end.

For those who think that the war against civilized ended with the extermination of the ethnic groups, hunter-gatherer nomads, original people of these lands in the war of the wild ones (chichimeca), after more than 400 years, allow us to tell you that you thought wrong.

We are the warrior legacy!

Those who sustain this dirty system will not live peacefully…

<strong>Wild Reaction / Reacción Salvaje (RS)</strong><br>
<strong>“Kill or Die” Group / Grupúsculo “Matar o Morir”</strong>

<center>
[[w-r-jpeg-wild-reaction-the-communiques-of-wild-rea-1.jpeg][First photo of RS]]
[[w-r-jpeg-wild-reaction-the-communiques-of-wild-rea-3.jpeg][Second photo of RS]]
</center>

For those who may think that the individuals from the photograph are “our leaders,” let us say this is a lie. 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.

The photograph was a proposal from one of the groups, to show its individual capacity to inflict damage by means of firearms, and to visually express the extreme defense of wild nature. While the image is full of symbolism and meanings, we only explain one: The feather in the hat of one of them represents that they have taken a life, this subject is sitting under the letter “s,” the first letter of the name Salinas, of Ernesto Méndez Salinas, the biotechnologist assassinated in Cuernavaca in 2011, the first mortal victim of ITS.

Enemies, observe well! This is not a game, it is not a joke, it is real!

We have the weapons, the explosives and the warrior legacy in our blood, we are coming for you!

[1] To avoid our tendency falling into confusion or mutation, falsification or alteration, for the phrases published in our communiques we have decided to put at the end of each one only the first letter of the author’s name. With these, if you recognize their works, know that we include them because we agree only with this phrase, but not with all of their thought or opinion.

[2] On April 19, 2011, the maintenance worker of the Polytechnic University of Mexico Valley (UPVM), Alberto Álvarez, opened a package-bomb that was addressed to the head of the Nanotechnology degree, Camacho Olguín; for his carelessness he ended up with hearing trauma, burns on his hands, and an amputated eye. Later, in February 21, 2013, the employee in charge of maintaining the mailboxes of the Mexican Postal Service, José Luis García, decided to steal a package that caught his attention, which he did not know was a package containing an explosive with a concrete addressee (who we will not speak of), again, on opening the package, for his carelessness and deliberate behavior, the employee ended up with hearing trauma, first- and second-degree burns on his legs, arms, face and the fracture of one of his hands.

[3] Even though as ITS we have been denying it for more than three years, only recently we continue to be categorized as his “followers,” one can read evidence of this in the articles “NanoBombers: A Look at the Terrorist Group that’s trying to kill scientists”, from April 9, 2014, published on the New York web site “Vocativ”, and “As technology swamps our lives, the next Unabombers are waiting for their moment”, from May 13, 2014, published in the English periodical “The Telegraph”.

*** Second Communique (November 2014)

It is true, we are not at all altruistic nor charitable, that became clear on November 14 when we detonated an explosive charge at the “Mexico Teletón Foundation” in Tlalnepantla,  México.

Approaching the day when the submissive and numb Mexican society unites in front of the television to sympathize with disabled children used to accumulate large sums of money is close and the “benevolent” industries don’t pay taxes, we detonated our explosive, which that while the mere act had nothing to do with “demands for social justice”, nor political colors, nor anything of the sort. In case anyone will think that.

Our trade is something else, some know it very well. We attacked this Foundation because it is one of the institutions along with the private initiatives and mass media, that implement alienation through the technoindustiral system’s values such as “promiscuous solidarity”, “peace”, “progress”, “humanism”, etc. Because they spread at great length the moral that society should continue to “calm its temper”, now in a country which lives in political, economic, and social crisis.

The “Teletón Foundation”, is also an agency along with the two most prestigious universities in Mexico (UNAM and ITESM), in charge of the development of technological and scientific innovation with therapeutic purposes, to say, together they completely adhere to the idea of civilized progress, to make sure this system follows its course. Surely many will ask: And what harm is caused by the existence of these types of charities for disabled people? Perhaps the questioners have not taken into account that the system always dresses as a “well intentioned nun” to continue perpetuating itself. Complete technology will always have the same purpose in whichever of its forms, whether therapeutic or weaponizing, educational or of massive destruction, medicinal or poisonous. And that purpose is to continue existing over wild nature, because of this our attack.

Without more explanations: We are not Christians, nor do we characterize nobility, we do not seek nor defend charity from anyone or with anyone!

Wild Reaction
“Nocturnal Hunter Faction”


*** Third Communique (February 2015)

February 25, 2015
Guanajuato, México

To the group “Uncivilized Conduct”.
To the group “Wild/Terrorist Behaviors”.
To all the “Wild Reaction” groups of action, written dissemination and study.
To all those who feel identified with the tendency opposed to the techno-industrial system and in favor of wild nature.

Artificiality and its domination of nature grow broader by the day, the plague of progress has managed to sicken what flies in the air, what lives on the earth, and what swarms in the ocean depths.

Modern civilization is out of its own control, to the point where the technicians who sustain the system create desperate alternatives that make it perpetuate itself with more strength and devastation.”

In the face of this summarized situation, a question arises: If technology is growing, why doesn’t resistance to its harmfulness?

Reading the recent communiques transmitted from Argentina and Chile[4] in recent months, we have noticed a surprising affinity bound to these tribes of distant warriors, which greatly encourage us to have greater resolve in terrorist and sabotage action as well as in the development of an anti-technology critique, all toward the important growth of the eco-extremist tendency, which stakes itself on the destabilization of the system and positions itself in favor of the wild.

We know well that in other countries in America, Europe and Asia, there are individualists who feel identified with this tendency, whether anarchists or not, and so we invite them to form part of this whole, with the formation of a group of critique that gives an important contribution to solidifying the positions, or carefully spreading printed material, or opening blogs, or editing books, or making music, or acting anonymously, or living a life free from civilized comfort, or claiming sabotages and terrorist attacks, etc, everyone will know how to do it in their way and under their own circumstances and responsibilities.

Let it not be confused: this is not “solidarity,” it is complicity.

Let it not be confused: this is not for the creation of a movement, it is for the constant desire to destabilize this system.

This is only a small message for all those who perceive these words and take them as their own, we do not want and are not interested in “placing” bases or “regulations” within this tendency, because eco-extremism is made by each of the individuals who have the need to strike back at what is alien and has come to invade our lives and environments.

Reacción Salvaje (Wild Reaction)
Grupúsculos:
“Manto de Piel-Coyote” (Coyote-skin Cloak)
“Matar o Morir” (Kill or Die)
“Aborígenes Infames” (Infamous Aboriginals)

PS: We give our appreciation to the effort of the translators (of our communiques and claims), through whose effort of diffusion, our words have reached countries that we never thought they would reach.

[4] “First communique from Uncivilized Conduct,” published November 1st, 2014. The text is available [in Spanish] on the blog “El Tlatol” [and in English here at War On Society]. “First words from Wild/Terrorist Behaviors,” published December 24, 2014. Text available on the same blog and on “Contrainfo“, [and in English here].

*** Fourth Communique (April 2015)

“Have you felt the light rain falling on you, which in a moment is transformed into a torrential storm that leaves you completely soaked?”

That’s how we came down, like a torrential storm after the light drizzle.

On the night of April 9, we left an explosive device in a Ford car dealership located at the corner of Sor Juana Avenue and Riva Palacio Street, a few blocks from Tlalnepantla City Hall, State of Mexico. As usual the authorities hid the fact.

In the distance the device detonated, violating the peaceful civilized night and transgressing the monotonous silence of the city. It was then again that we reclaimed ourselves as nocturnal hunters, as individualists who do not accept the life and the conditions imposed on us by the technological system, and act on our own terms and conditions, without mediation, without limitation, without regard to others.

We detonated the explosive at a dealership because we repudiate such harmful, contaminating, and invasive means of transportation as automobiles. Those roaming pieces of metal and plastic deserve to burn or be destroyed like this civilization and system.

Undoubtedly, cars, cell phones, electrical appliances, communication lines, etc., are an inseparable part of techno-industrial progress, progress which reduces and pushes wild nature to artificial extinction, thus our attack.

Explosives will continue detonating…

Regardless of damage or injuries…

Wild Reaction
Night Hunter Group

*** Fifth Communique (April 2015)

April 17, 2015

The  group “Until your death or mine” burned a cellphone tower on the México-Toluca highway at the height of the Atizapán municipality, México State. We broke the fence and barbed wire which “protected” the antenna and placed an incendiary device with homemade retarder on the power supply cables. Later we watched the device light and illuminate the night, the fire expanding from the burned antennae and damaging some property of that damn Telemex company.

The antenna was left useless, in this way we continue the string of actions in which as we have already reiterated in advance, everything which makes up and symbolizes civilization, progress, technology, artificiality, and science will be attacked in any form.

Wild nature reclaims what belongs to it, the hills separated by the aforementioned highway, the trees chopped down for the construction of the high tension power and communication cables, animals (human and not) forced to abandon their habitat by the pestilent expansion of civilization, everything which progress has not respected and does not respect screams vengeance, our ancestors possessed our minds, now the fire of war is ours.

Resistance to everything else!

Wild Reaction
Group “Until your death or mine”

*** Sixth Communique (May 2015)

The Tunel Emisor Oriente (TEO) is one of the largest registered engineering projects having to do with deep drainage systems. Built to avoid flooding in the cities, it begins in the state of Hidalgo and passes through towns in Mexico State. The TEO is composed of 24 Lumbreras which are able to take in up to 150 cubic meters of waste water per second. The Lumbreras (which are large holes in the earth), act as vents for entry into the tunnel and for doing maintenance on it with heavy machinery.

Involved in this effort are various institutions of the federal government[5] and various private businesses[6]. One of their goals (aside from “saving” the rotten cities from the floods that wild nature sends as a response to the devastating industrial progress) is the hypocritical function of environmental improvement. What environmental improvement are they talking about? The “improvement” that consists of destroying a vast zone of grasslands and forests for their convertible tunnel that safeguards the integrity of civilization? Because that is what they have done with their construction: trees were uprooted, green zones left buried by the concrete of their “Mexican exterior circuit” highway that runs along these Lumbreras, native animals were also affected, the river that runs through this area was turned into a canal of black water and disgusting trash, the ecological balance was violated again by human progress: if this is what “improvement” means to the architects and defenders of this “magnum opus,” then they are doing very well.

This is why the “Groupuscule of The Occult” of Wild Reaction made for one of the TEO Lumbreras on the night of April 22nd, between the towns of Nextlalpan and Tonanitla in Mexico State, we leapt over the barbed wire fence that protects the canal of black water and behind a large pepper tree that remained standing, we performed several firearm detonations against the machines, structures and walls of the construction. The shots damaged and terrorized those who were in the site, and with the thunder of the detonating bullets were the sounds of the animals killed for the construction, the violent rush of the wind that moved the leaves of the trees now fallen, and the imperceptible song of the water of the river turned black by the artificial, and were also the war cries of our ancestors: Axcan Kema Tehuatl Nehuatl! (“Now it’s you or me!” - translators note)

Of no use were the scandalous illumination, the surveillance of the place and the nighttime patrols of state and federal police, The Occult covered ourselves in our cloak and took off without a problem.

With this armed action we declare:

Death and blood to those who destroy the Earth!

There will be more bullets to their structures and to their heads!

For the extremist defense of wild nature!

At war against the technological system!

Wild Reaction (Reacción Salvaje)
“Groupuscule of The Occult” (Grupúsculo de Lo Oculto)


[5] Respectively, the Secretery of the Environment and Natural Resources (SEMARNAT), the National Commission of Water (CONAGUA), the Secretery of Agriculture and Public Credit (SHCP) and the Secretery of Public Works (SFP).

[6] The Mexican Construction of Underground Infrastructure (Comissa), Carso Infrastructure and Construction S.A.B. de CV (Cicsa) (a Carlos Slim company), Associated Civil Engineers (ICA), Construction and Grinding, Lombardo and Estrella Construction, and the Federal Electricity Commission (CFE).

*** Seventh Communique (May 2015)

We do not respect or serve any laws other than the natural laws, we despise the whole cumulous of words compiled in thick books, which under punishment dictate the behavior of individuals. We reject and deny the laws of the governments, the moral laws imposed by the society, the western cultural laws, the technological laws of innovation, the laws of the injurious religions’ creeds, all those artificial and ephemeral mandates collapse under their own weight, we challenge them and mock them, attacking head-on.

This is why, in the night of April 25, we set off toward the Palace of Justice in Atizapán, Zaragoza, on the Lago de Guadalupe highway, and abandoned one of our explosives right in front of the aforementioned edifice.

At a distance of a few blocks, the device activated and the streets were invaded by the explosion’s sound wave; the nighttime street vendors and the cars that passed by the place were witness to this act of negation.

Know this well: the groupuscules of Wild Reaction also have governmental institutions in their sights, since these are the faithful reflection of the rotting of this civilization, and of the absurd dynamics of the industrial society, at which we scoff with this sort of action.

The bombs will keep exploding and their boom is but the light breeze of wild nature over us; it is only a matter of time until Wild Reaction’s hunt bears fruit...

Wild Reaction (Reacción Salvaje)
Groupuscule “until your death or mine!” (Grupúsculo ¡Hasta tu muerte o la mía!)


*** Eighth Communique (May 2015)

The morning of May 14 of this year, we prepared a fire extinguisher full of dynamite, black powder and phosphorous powder with a homemade slow-fuse detonator. We abandonded it on the outskirts of the Cuautitlán campus of the Higher Studies School (FES-C), a school belonging to UNAM, near one of its entries.

We left the device along with a false one, which was intended to create more tension after the fire extinguisher detonated.

The FES-C, home to several of the scientists who work in various sciences cruel to Nature, two examples being Armando Shimada and Adriana Galem Rondero, who attack the natural in their areas of investigation and use their knowledge to impose, in one way or another, the artificiality of this technological system. The detonation was for them and for their progressive students whose sights are set on expanding, with their academic studies, the anthropocentric modernity which is carrying us to destruction as a species. The modern human is the one who thinks that they have all the answers, meddling in natural cycles and perverting them with their evidence and their complex tests between four walls, in order to thus fabricate “answers” and supposed “truths” which the resultant society swallows whole. “Answers” or “truths” that are discharged from their closed scientific points of view, which in the final count are NOTHING in the face of the force of the Unknown in Nature. UNAM has been the nest of many recognized scientists such as the mathematician José Antonio de la Peña, the physicists Adolfo Sánchez Valenzuela and Jorge Flores Valdés, and the biologist Valeria Souza, the time is coming when there is security neither inside nor outside the school. If they remain determined to attack Nature, we will return the blow.

Since “Individualists tending toward the wild” abandoned an explosive package inside this same institution in September 2011, let them know it again, they continue to be OUR target, there is no doubt of that. UNAM and all its offices and departments continue to be the target, as well as private universities.

As usual, the state authorities hid the event; we did it without a care, we left the explosive right under their noses, in broad daylight. Do they believe that trying to block the sound with their fingers will stop us?

Let fear and terror return to the research centers!
Until we demolish the foundations of the Tower of Science!
For the extreme defense of Wild Nature!

Wild Reaction (Reacción Salvaje)
Groupuscule Thunder of the Mixtón (Grupúsculo Trueno del Mixtón)
Groupuscule of the Unknown (Grupúsculo de Lo Desconocido)


*** Ninth Communique (May 2015)

In the morning of April 14 of this year, we left a book-bomb in the facilities of the University of Mexico Valley (UVM), on its Coacalco campus in Mexico State.

The explosive was addressed to the Department of Communication Sciences. This is by far one of the most demanded academic degrees for the workforce, spanning journalists to filmmakers, and although it encompasses various branches, most are focused on feeding the diffusion apparatus of progress and technology.

The system needs propaganda, needs people who are responsible for manipulation and alienation in mass (and non-mass) media, it needs to make the passive and dissident masses see a half “truth”, which goes for virtual media as much as for persons dedicated to covering up its greatest lies. Or was it not the communications experts who were in charge of trying to hide Grupo México’s attack on nature with its spilling of toxic waste in Sonora last year (to mention an example)? It was them, the ones who insist on accommodating progress in this decadent society, who sell their “labor” to make the system continue to extend, propagating attitudes that the recipients unconsciously transform into values, which tend to be inoffensive for the convenience of the same technological system.

As is customary, the act was silenced, maybe by the political crisis threatening the country, maybe by anarchists’ call to boycott the upcoming elections, maybe because the commotion wouldn’t be in the private university’s interest, whatever it was, what we are sure of is that if they keep hiding our deeds we will see the need to generalize the extremist attack against civilization and technological progress, with explosives, arsons and well-aimed bullets.

Let it be known again…

For the defense of wild nature and against the technological system!

Wild Reaction (Reacción Salvaje)<br>
Groupuscules:<br>
“Thunder of the Mixtón” (“Trueno del Mixtón”)<br>
“Master of the Green Fire” (“Señor del Fuego Verde”)

*** Tenth Communique (June 2015)

Several months ago, the communication media falsely attributed to us a series of attacks on various targets in different parts of the Mexican republic, for which reason we want to present the following:

1. The groupuscules of Wild Reaction (RS) do not have contact or overlap, direct or indirect, with anarchist groups of an insurrectional, anti-prison, or liberationist stripe, nor any of their variants.

Although it is worth mentioning with all sincerity that some of their actions have been applauded by some of RS’ members (although NOT all) at some time, actions in Mexico like the burning of the metrobus, for example.

2. On the 30th of September of last year, a group of encapuchados attacked a property of UNAM with molotov cocktails; in the skirmish, firearms were detonated against the campus security, and even though we did not make any statement (since the means as much as the claim of the deed made it obvious that it was not us) at the time, the communication media FALSELY placed responsibility for the action on us.

3. During the month of April and May of this year, 2015, some groupuscules of RS carried out various attacks and attempts in the town of the State of Mexico, the offensive, which was framed as a group “sub-phase” around the reutilization of old means (b), combined with the undeniable evidence of our operational level, called the attention of the media, which distorted the information from our communiques. On April 27-28, they published notes that (again) falsely put responsibility on us for the explosive in the INE in Puebla on March 27 (c), an act that was carried out by an anarchist group, but who in their text (according to what we read) did not answer to any psuedonym, signature or initials. As always, the press wants to put a name on everything to occupy their spaces of rotten fallacies.

4. During the early hours of June 1st, persons unknown carried out coordinated attacks in the capital of Puebla, the communcation media again wanted to involve us (d). Through this small text we say that none of the groupuscules of Wild Reaction are involved in these attacks, nor in the political demands of those responsible. It was NOT RS that proposed the “Black June” campaign, RS does NOT consider itself a political group that intends to boycott the elections; RS has always distanced itself from political-popular demands due to considering them outside of our individualist tendency and unconnected to our practical interests.

RS is a group of politically-incorrect individualists who violently attack the material bases of the scientific-technological system, civilization and human progress, nothing more, nothing less!

We know who the ones trying to involve us are, we know the state-press game, the federal government has been trying to deal with us for some time, but in their desperate attempt to get some evidence they are smearing some people who have nothing to do with RS. We know that this is not the last time that they will try to involve us with them, but there will always be a response from us…

In extreme defense of and for wild nature.
Against the technological system, civilization and progress.

Wild Reaction (Reacción Salvaje)

Groupuscules:<br>
Kill or Die (Matar o Morir)<br>
Nocturnal Hunter (Cazador Nocturno)<br>
Coyote-Skin Cloak (Manto de Piel-coyote)<br>
Rain of Arrows (Lluvia de flechas)<br>
Until Your Death or Mine! (Hasta tu muerte o la mía!)<br>
Uaxixil Spirit (Espíritu Uaxixil)<br>
Thunder of the Mixtón (Trueno del Mixtón)<br>
Master of the Green Fire (Señor del Fuego Verde)<br>
Of the Occult (De lo Oculto)<br>
Council of the Uehuetlatolli (Concejo del Uehuetlatolli)<br>
Wild Cat Lurker (Acecho de Gato Montes)

______________________________
Notes:

a) “PGR investigating Wild Reaction Group.” Azteca Noticias, October 3, 2014.

b) These old methods refer to the explosive devices detonated in a Ford dealership in Tlalnepantla (April 9th), in the Palace of Justice in Atizapán (April 25th) and in the Cuautitlan Department of Higher Studies (May 14), as well as the placement of a book-bomb in the Coalcalco UVM campus (April 15), the arson that severely damaged a Telmex telephone tower in Atizapán (April 17), the belated claim of incendiary attacks carried out in Xalapa (Veracruz 2011), Saltillo (Coahuila 2011), and the explosives detonated in the State of Mexico, Irapuato and León (Guanajuanto 2010-2011). It is worth mentioning that a new method was also put into practice: the armed attack against a Lumbrera of the Tunel Emisor Oriente (April 22) in Nextlalpan.

c) “Wild Reaction claims the attack on Puebla INE.” E-consulta, April 27, 2015.

d) “Explosive attacks on the Pubela INE, SE and metrobus.” La Jornada, June 1, 2015.

*** Eleventh Communique (July 2015)

Chikomoztok, July 8, 2015

The company ICA (Civil and Associated Engineers) is the giant of infrastructure in Mexico. The construction of freeways, urban complexes, hydroelectric plants, airports, refineries, metro stations and more, are the areas that this company manages. Consequently, ICA is one of the targets to attack, since we consider their mere presence in whatever place they are building to be involved in the perpetuation of the system, which develops itself through the destruction of nature, contamination of ecosystems, disturbance of the natural order, etc. This company, property of the abhorrent magnate Carlos Slim, is one of the main responsible entities that make civilization’s stain grow exponentially, converting this artificial reality into something completely alien, mediated and limiting.

The persons responsible for part of this sort of business continuing are various, from the workers to the engineers, administrators and investors, each and every one of these people are undeserving of the slightest consideration, all are enrolled within the industry of infrastructure, which is a latent threat that drives the disappearance and subjugation of wild nature.

In the early hours of July 5, we headed for the offices of the Grupo Cuevas (located in the Tepetlacalco neighborhood in Tlalnepantla, Mexico State), a consortium closely tied to the ICA company, and left a package bomb inside their parking lot, addressed to this conglomerate of engineers which, even though they are the ones charged with designing and maintaining the constructions of a civilization always in areas of expansion, is decadent.

According to the news from the press,[7] on July 6th the letter was brought inside the building and opened by one of the secretaries who works in those offices, which caused the package bomb to explode, creating a nervous breakdown, police mobilization, and alarm among the engineers complicit in civilization’s devastation. Even though, according to the press, due to a failure in the activation mechanism the device didn’t achieve full detonation, don’t worry, we’re already working on making the next one more forceful…

With this act we want to say to the engineers (tied to the ICA or not): You are in our sights, we will not stop until we return the attack that you have carried out against wild nature. Today it was a package bomb, maybe tomorrow it will be something more…

Enough contemplation, no negotiations or limitations!
All against the technological system!

Wild Reaction<br>
Groupuscules:<br>
“Nocturnal Hunter”<br>
“Thunder of the Mixtón”

[7] “Sobre provoca explosión de baja magnitud en Tlalnepantla” [“Letter sets off low-intensity explosion in Tlalnepantla”]. El Universal, July 7, 2015.

*** Twelfth Communique (July 2015)

Chikomoztoc, July 3, 2015.

“But how can we pretend that one dies in time who has never lived in time? It would be better if they had not been born. This is what Nature desires for the people who are extraneous in the world.” – F.

Envelopes with electromechanical activation and incendiary charge have been left in various targets in Mexico State, yesterday, July 2 of this year:

– The Commission of Human Rights of Mexico State (Ecatepec General Office of Investigations): located on Avenida Morelos a few blocks from downtown San Cristóbal, the envelope was addressed to the head of investigations.

We decided to attack this institution since it symbolizes humanism and progressivism, we repudiate all those who go screeching to these kinds of committees to demand guarantees of their human “rights,” “respect” for their group decisions and an “end” to repression; it is absurd that these low-lives expect these kinds of meager organizations to resolve their problems, to protect, and defend them. A clear example of how is that the modern human has put his own security in the hands of strangers, instead of taking justice into his own hands and defending himself as he did before. These kinds of institutions are a banality, the “pus,” only a simple facade for dissimulating the system’s incapacity to manage internal problems in a decadent society, and this is why we attacked it.[8]

– The Valley Division of North Mexico (Federal Electricity Commission), Ecatepec Zone: located between Avenia Revolución and the México-Texcoco Highway, the envelope was addressed to the head of this division.

For us, attacks directed against the heads of the electrical substations are just as valid as attacks against their facilites. Any attack against this kind of industry is justified, whether the target opens the package and is wounded, or anyone who works in this institution, at the end of the day it’s the same, everyone working for the progress of the technological system and the devastation of the nature that remains - some out of “necessity” and others to maintain their defined economic status, so they deserve what happens to them. The associated people are not absolved of causing the action.[9]

– Lucerna University (Coacalco Campus): located on Avenida López Portillo, the envelope was addressed to the professor in charge of the Department of Information Technology.

In the present era, full of digital data, technological innovations, and artificial aberrations, it is vitally important to continue the project of attacking these kinds of sciences, which, day by day, stupefy the dependent minds of the enslaved modern human, making a total absurdity of the imposed reality. Sciences like these, which tend toward alienation and have declared war on the Wild, need to be an objective and fixed target of those who, like ourselves, cling to their most primal and wild past.[10]

Today, like yesterday, we shout to the four winds:
Nature is good, Civilization is bad!

Wounds and sabotages against those in charge of maintaining the electrical industry!
Shrapnel in the bodies of the leaders of humanist institutions!
Death for those who prepare the way toward a super-artificial and hyper-civilized present!

Wild Reaction<br>
Groupuscules:<br>
“Thunder of the Mixtón”<br>
“Master of the Green Fire”

[8] This attack caught the attention of the communication media; that same day the periodical Milenio published “Package with explosive bursts in Edomex DH investigations.” In the journalist news it is disclosed that a public official of that institution had opened the package and was wounded by the explosion. We do not regret their wounds or their terror, we have availed ourselves of surprise and deception to continue with this war against civilization and human progress, and so we will continue to do.

[9] About this action El Universal published that same day “Envelope with explosive device left in CFE-Ecatepec,” the news confirmed that the package was found, but was encapsulated and set off by the police bomb squad without any injuries.

[10] There was no public reference about this last action.

*** Appendix I: ‘Some answers about the present and NOT about the future’ (November 2014)

Pachuca, Hidalgo, November 13 2014.

With this statement, some groupuscules of “Wild Reaction” (RS), will respond to the text “Some ideas about the present and the future” from “Ediciones Isumatag” (EI), published on their blog -- http://isumatag.blogspot.com/ -- on October 6 of this year (2014).

At the same time, with this writing we demonstrate the existing distinction among critics of the industrial-technological system, specifically among those who are bent on and advocate the creation of an “organized movement capable of contributing to the overthrow of such a system”, and those like we who do not seek that, but rather, to attack the development of the system's progress from the present, tending to destabilize it.

With this text, we do not intend at all to open the sterile and impractical debate on future or present strategies which “have to” be taken while facing the industrial-technological system. Everyone decides their own path. What follows is just a quick exposure of our tendency regarding this topic. The intelligent ones who tend towards the wild will know very well how to analyze and criticize this communique.

**** I

**Clearing doubts:**

In January 2012 Individualists tending towards the wild (ITS) published its sixth communique, which from the start announced itself as a self-critique, in addition to publicly accepting mistakes from past communiques, but more than that, this sixth communique was an indirect response (as some have rightly mentioned before)[11] to criticisms published that same month by Último Reducto (UR) -- https://waronsociety.noblogs.org/?p=9238 -- and Anónimos con Cautela (AC) -- https://waronsociety.noblogs.org/?p=8972 -- editorial groups.

At the time, ITS welcomed most of UR’s critique, it helped very much for solidifying positions and to push us to let go of some leftist, relativist thematics alien to what we wanted to form.

In fact, all those who have ever read the works of UR, might have noticed that they had a strong influence on the primary formation of our ideas.

UR themselves have written:

“Much of the discourse and terminology used in their communiques is taken from the writings of Kaczynski and UR (although in cases where they’re taking UR as reference, they do not explicitly say so)”[12]

At the time, by strategy and prudence, we never made direct mention of the influence of UR, as not to jeopardize their editorial work, being that we are an underground group with terrorist history, but since we are clearing doubts, and a few years have past since these events, we make it public.

**** II

**Beyond the term “Revolution”**

Ever since signing as ITS, we’ve rejected the term “revolution”. We’ve always criticized and cast aside the term that has been used to name the hypothetical process by which the destruction of the techno-industrial system would “have to” go through to be attained, as some like EI say.

But for now let’s put aside the “revolution” as a term[13], and focus on the problem as a strategy.

Freedom Club (FC) proposed in 1995, a “revolution” to end the techno-industrial system in its essay “Industrial Society and Its Future”. From then on, some people have taken this proposal as the only valid one for this hypothetical triumph in this hypothetical future.

But let’s take it one piece at a time. One of the cornerstones of the “anti-techno-industrial revolution” is the analogy between the French and Russian revolutions with the overthrow of this system. According to this, what preceded the collapse of the above regimes was a web of social, military, political, economic and environmental problems. At the same time, in these societies, values contrary to the traditional ones began to sprout from the common rationalists (in the case of France) and the soviets (for Russia). This is explained in the above mentioned essay by FC:

“French society and Russian society, for several decades prior to their respective revolutions, showed increasing signs of stress and weakness. Meanwhile, ideologies were being developed that offered a new world-view that was quite different from the old one.”[14]

FC, also writes about the model this “revolution” would have to go by:

“It will be objected that the French and Russian Revolutions were failures. But most revolutions have two goals. One is to destroy an old form of society and the other is to set up the new form of society envisioned by the revolutionaries. The French and Russian revolutionaries failed (fortunately!) to create the new kind of society of which they dreamed, but they were quite successful in destroying the old society (…) Our goal is only to destroy the existing form of society.”[15]

In light of these specific annotations RS refutes and believes that:

The preceding conditions to a “revolution” are always crises in the various factors that make up a system. In history there are many examples (not just that pair) of how a small group of intellectuals, philosophers and thinkers, can have a huge influence when the destruction (with or without violence) of existing societies is proposed, as well as in its success (based on the first objective written by FC, with respect to “revolutions”). These examples are, the Cuban, Sandinista, Chinese, Iraqi, Vietnamese, Portuguese “revolutions”, the neo-Nazi “revolution” in Germany, and the Fascist one in Italy, etc…

What characterizes each of these “revolutions” and their victory in destroying (through whatever means) imposed social models in their moment of history, is that they were focused only within their respective territorial limits, and although some conflicts infected other countries (like after the Cuban revolution with the various armed uprisings in Latin America that finally ended in dictatorships and massacres), the overthrow of these regimes always occurred in a specific area and not worldwide, like the global revolution proposed by FC[16].

The internationalist proposal by Ted Kaczynski (formerly FC) and his followers, errs in utopia and fantasy. In a quick but thorough overview of history, never before a “revolution” has had global success, with the exception of the industrial revolution.

Many may find it uncomfortable to accept that the only revolution that has triumphed globally (and beyond, with the first man on the Moon, and on Mars soon) in achieving its task of destroying the values and instincts of wild human nature, and perpetuate a new society based on artificiality, industrialization and advanced technique, has been the industrial one.

Even though, before the industrial revolution, human beings were already somewhat removed from the optimal locations, biologically programmed for living in freedom and autonomy, the present indicates that the progress of this revolution and the complexity of its systems of self-perpetuation have caused a significant turning point towards artificiality and forgetting the natural and the wild.

Neither the most resistant internationalist communist, nor the most totalitarian dictator, were able to expand their “revolutions” internationally, could the “antitech revolutionaries” do otherwise? Could they overthrow the techno-industrial system worldwide, taking advantage of a global crisis?

RS responds: Unlikely, and so far, impossible.

Today, crises come and go, and although in some countries the crisis has persisted for decades, civilization and the system have run their course, so far.

Presently we live in a severe global financial crisis that has been worsening since 2008,[17] unemployment in first world countries like Greece, Spain, France and Australia is serious,[18] not to mention in developing countries. Many companies are going bankrupt or have disappeared[19]. Countries like Turkey, Ukraine, Syria, Egypt, Afghanistan, Venezuela, Japan, Mexico, among others, are immersed in political-economic problems and social unrest.[20] The stock markets of China, India, Thailand, etc., have fallen and their central banks have experienced alarming reductions in their financial reserves.[21] Economies like Brazil, Argentina, United States, and even the vast majority of the nations of the European Union are in recession or at risk of it.[22]

On the environmental side, the levels of carbon dioxide are increasing, and affecting greatly across the globe. The changes in temperature are abrupt, droughts have lengthened,[23] population growth has reached the point of horribly affecting semi-wild, wild and even “protected”[24] natural environments, species of wild flora and fauna are threatened every day, over-exploitation of wood is deforesting ever-growing areas, the leviathan of Civilization, together with the system, reduce everything natural to mere urbanized waste.

The health crisis is also alarming. Cancer has positioned itself as the disease of the 21st century, along with it, the pharmaceutical industry clog infect bodies with harmful drugs which, instead of healing, kill patients in an extremely painful and humiliating way.[25]

Not to mention Ebola, which has killed hundreds and infected thousands in Africa. The virus threatens to spread through the world if nations do not implement stringent health and safety measures to prevent it.[26]

What is being favored by the growth of the global crisis, is that sooner or later a world war breaks out in which the strongest powers, strategically and militarily speaking, achieve taking the “whole pie” as an exit to the crisis. That, or the same system will be able to repair all its failings and move on to a new financial system where economic differences between the elites and the masses are “leveled” and technological innovations make “natural resources” close to exhaustion, expendable.

In another vein of ideas, FC also writes:

“(…) propaganda of the rabble-rousing type may be necessary when the system is nearing the point of collapse and there is a final struggle between rival ideologies to determine which will become dominant when the old world-view goes under.”[27]

An extreme naivety and a misinterpretation of reality is what is reflected in this paragraph. Perhaps these “revolutionaries” think they’re the only ones who are waiting for the collapse in order to achieve their goals, nothing is further from reality. Nowadays, several groups are waiting for that opportunity, such powerful political and economic groups to which these “revolutionary” cannot compare at all. So the strategy of waiting for “the neighbor (the system) to be sick to kill him”, brings an important problem, because there are many other “neighbors” even other “colonies” waiting for the system to get weak so they can strike it down and put themselves in its place.

As is said in the fourth principle proposed by FC,[28] it can not be trusted that the destruction of the system would be as thought by its theorists and critics; maybe even those who improve and develop the techno-industrial system, when the time comes, would realize that a movement is dedicated to destroy it, (if it ever exists, persists and actually becomes a global threat), and decide to dismantle that movement through the thousand and one ways that their secret security apparatus know how to do (infiltration, internal problems, low intensity war, state terrorism, espionage, disruption by controlled divisions, intimidation, etc.), and maybe that revolution which was thought distanced from leftism, gets converted by the system into another of its many mechanisms of self-perpetuation, as to become stronger and continue to exist. Of course, this is only an assumption, but in short we could clarify that it is in that, in assumption, which is based the “anti-techno-industrial revolution” strategy, this we can ensure by reading the following lines from their representatives and most known thinkers:

“Of course, all this is a possibility, a serious crisis may never occur, and if it does occur, may not lead to collapse of the techno-industrial society, and is overcome. Maybe a movement organized and strong enough to wipe out the techno-industrial system when the opportunity comes, is never created. But there is also the possibility that all these things do occur and the techno-industrial system is destroyed on time.”[29]

“The key question here is whether it is possible. And the answer is neither ‘yes’ or ‘no’, but ‘it depends’. It depends on the circumstances. A great many future and present circumstances.” “Is it sure that this happens? No. Is it sure it will not happen? Neither. Like many questions of the future, there are great uncertainties.”[30]

FC also points out, this can be read, in uppercases by RS, in footnote 6 of the present communique, and in this paragraph:

“(…) If experience indicates that some of the recommendations made in the foregoing paragraphs are not going to give good results, then those recommendations should be discarded.”[31]

Although in truth, this method cannot be ruled out yet, because those who work in favor of this “revolution” have not tested it, since for now there is no “strong and organized” movement dedicated to that, or even an attempt of it to give these “revolutionaries” experiences. The question is, will they discard it one day? Not even they know.

Maybe in a decade or more, the global crisis deepens and brings the system to the brink of collapse, but will time suffice for the “revolutionaries” to foster the collapse of the system? Surely they do not know either…

Some of these “revolutionaries” have said that the formation of this movement can last for years or even decades, giving themselves the luxury of waiting for something concrete, as if wild nature will also be waiting for the “intelligent anti-techs” to be prepared and the conditions to be right.

It would be wiser and more attractive that the “revolutionaries” give their intelligent readers, the certainties that they can do what they propose, that they are sure that what they do will give solid results, instead of pure speculation on the formation of a movement and the broadening of it for the subsequent overthrow of the techno-industrial system. But hey, they’ve laid their strategy…

So, in conclusion to this point, the strategic basis for the “great revolution” is supposition, “perhaps”, “hopefully”, “it may be”, “in best of cases”, “it depends”, in other words, nothing concrete, all in the wind. This reminds us of what a popular Mexican comedian said in his shows: “Maybe yes, maybe no, but most likely is, who knows.”

The “revolutionaries” can WAIT while they PREPARE themselves for the huge global crisis! Us, we do not trust futuristic idealizations, we rely on the present, the present which indicates that both our natural human essence, and that of wild nature in general, is being reduced to domestication, obedience and subjugation to the techno-industrial system and the values of its society, in reaction to that, attack and armed resistance is fundamental.

**** III

**Relative defeatism**

We do not want to remain inert to the great loss of the wild, we have not decided to sit back, some as “Isumatag” have labeled us with the hackneyed and relativistic term “defeatist”, even UR have illustrated this by the following:

“If by ‘defeatist’ we mean the attitude that means abandoning the fight for considering it lost beforehand, ITS is not defeatist, it has not abandoned its struggle. But if by ‘defeatist’ we mean the attitude that denies in advance any possibility of vanquishing when in fact it is not clear that there is any possibility, ITS is defeatist, as indicated by its way of understanding the concept of anti-technological revolution”[29]

It would be pointless and exhausting to think this issue over and over while trying to make the “revolutionaries” see that we are not “defeatists” so we leave this topic as is, since this judgment depends on individual perspectives.

When ITS (at the time), or groupuscules of RS, have stated that they expect nothing of the executed attacks, we are referring to what is strictly attached to the “revolutionary” or “transcendental of the struggle”. We do not expect the “revolution” or the “global crisis” nor “the proper conditions”, all we hope is that after an attack, we leave intact with our individualistic victory, with our hands full of life experiences for the next even more destructive, constant and menacing steps.

Earlier we stated that we did not expect anything positive from our actions, but actions have reactions and these have spread to others creating something positive for the limitless advancement of attack against the techno-industrial system. Thus, we see that on various websites and publications, news and reproductions of our communiques and actions can be read, along with several analyzes of these, this does not happen only with anarchist websites and publications but also with those of scientific, philosophical, academic and other interests.[32] We can count translations of our terrorist communiques to about ten different languages.[33] There have been several books published containing our words, the most recent entitled “La Naturaleza es el bien, la Civilización es el mal…” [Nature is good, Civilization is evil…][34] [35]. Similarly, a few weeks ago a new group positioning itself against the techno-industrial system with actions has emerged in Argentina, and promises more.[36]

**** IV

**Inherited insurrectionalism?**

“Ediciones Isumatag” writes in their text that direct confrontation is eventually suicide, and they’re right, except we’ve decided this ourselves, we know that we may have the same future of prison or death as the wild Chichimeca warriors, Tenamaztli and Maxorro, the same that happened to the indomitable Chiricahua, Mangas Coloradas and Cosiche, we know this very well. We have preferred to fight till death with the system, rather than conform and accept the status of hyper-domesticated humans that they want to impose on us, we remember that each individual is different, for some it is quite comfortable to deceive themselves in thinking that someday the great crisis will come and that until then they will act towards this hypothetical collapse of the system, but NOT for us, we are NOT idealists anymore, we see the present as it is, and it pushes us to direct confrontation, assuming its ultimate consequences.

We wrote it in the first RS communique:

“Day after day, we’re headed towards extinction, we’re on the edge of the abyss, we dont have in mind adapting ourselves to the system, nor to its submissive society, nor to its moral values”[37]

It is clear “the shoe fit” when EI read the editorial text of the Regresión publication, (the publishing group has also joined RS with the name of “Grupúsculo Manto de Piel–Coyote” [Coyote-skin Coat Groupuscule] these last weeks), and this is why they’re taking “private conversations” out of their old drawers and attack us with all their “resources”, even as these “resources” are disguised of alleged “serious analysis”. All because we do not share the strategy proposed by FC several years ago.

In a desperate ploy to label us as something we are not, EI asserts that within our tendency there are ideological matters inherited from insurrectionalism. They also write that by “adopting” these ideologies we are leftists, actually they think that of all groups acting and criticizing the techno-industrial system. Strange, because in fact, before “Conductas Incivilisadas” [Uncivilized Conduct] we were the only extremist group within that category, anyway. RS will not extended more focus on the tedious and impractical debate about whether or not we are leftists, because we are not, many have made this obvious, we aren’t trying to convince anyone of anything.

What is important to underline in the text by EI is the pathological type paranoia of leftism by which they’re overcome, saying they see leftism anywhere and categorizing almost everything of leftist except their circle of affinities, of course!

Regarding the critique they make of insurrectionalism, we’ll leave it to those of that ideology to respond, if they see fit, to what is said by “Isumatag“.

What RS indeed recognizes is our eco-anarchist past, (this we do not deny), which is very different from insurrectionary anarchism, you can not expect anything good from a person that can't differentiate these two currents.

RS has completely ruled out the idea of an “anti-technology movement”, not because we base ourselves in insurrectionalist ideas, but for all that we have said before in section I of this written work .

“Ediciones Isumatag” speaks of “serious and honest” analysis, we would like to see how they’ll “agitate” the masses when “it’s time”, will they do it honestly? NO, they’ll perhaps use deceptions and manipulations for the masses to kill each other to, according to this, destroy the system. Of course, with this comment we don’t position ourselves on the side of the masses, for us, societies might as well kill each other, what we are highlighting is the false modesty and misleading discourse writen by EI.

Like FC has said before:

“As for the negative consequences of eliminating industrial society — well, you can’t eat your cake and have it too. To gain one thing you have to sacrifice another.”[38]

EI apparently feels inferior when identified with labels of “café revolutionaries”, “armchair intellectuals”, etc., given that, the only thing left to say is: You feel as you wish! If EI feels put down by these labels employed by the practicals (ie, us) within critiques of the techno-industrial system, that’s not our problem.

In conclusion, we reproduce what we wrote in the sixth ITS communique:

“The struggle against the Techno-industrial System is not a game that we should win or lose, vanquish or be defeated; this is what many have still not understood and it seems that many are still expecting to be ‘rewarded’ in the future for their current actions as ‘revolutionaries’. One must accept that many things in life are not rewarded, that many tasks and/or ends are never achieved (including Autonomy) and the destruction of the techno-system by the work of the ‘revolutionaries’ is one of them. Now is not the time to wait for the imminent collapse, for those who want to take their time as if technological progress wouldn’t be growing by leaps and bounds and gradually devouring our sphere of individual Freedom.“

“For now there is no movement that positions itself radically against Technology, neither organized nor solid, if some day there is (if it triumphs and we are alive) then we will accept our mistake, in the meantime we will not accept futurist speculations wagering on a movement that helps to destabilize the system in its totality.”[39]

For the extreme defense of all that we have been losing:

Wild Reaction

Groupuscules:<br>
“Matar o Morir“ [Kill or Die]<br>
“Tinta de carbón“ [Carbon ink]<br>
“Manto de piel-Coyote” [Coyote-skin Cloak]


*** Appendix II: INCORRECT - An Interview with Wild Reaction (Trans. Chahta-Ima, Ed. Revista Regresión, Mexico 2015)



<strong>
Xaipiri Thepe (XT): This conversation took place electronically through the magazine Regresión and the
website El Tlatol. Through these sources we asked for the opportunity to have this conversation via email, and
this should not be interpreted as assent to or sympathy with the positions of RS. That out of the way, we would
like to ask: In February the magazine, “Destroy the Prisons”, strongly critiqued your radical ecological positions. What do you have to say regarding the criticism of this anti-prison magazine? What criticism do you have of prison abolitionism? What is your position regarding this sort of abolitionism as an alternative to depriving people of liberty?</strong>

RS: Well, to begin replying to that point, we would have to ask a series of other questions first, such as: How would this abolition be carried out? Would it be regional, international, universal, or other? Perhaps in that last question we are being facetious, as any person who is serious and realistic on this subject will realize beforehand that this is merely a childish fantasy and idealized utopianism. The jails will not be abolished if civilization continues, that’s obvious. But just to be clear, we are not saying by this that these people should struggle for the destruction of civilization instead.

That would be falling into the same unrealistic trap.

Human jails were made to contain those whose impulses, reactions, and instincts made them incapable of living in society in a peaceful way. The technological system has an essential role to play in the penitentiary structure. There would be many more prison breaks if not for the security cameras, motion detectors, drones, electric fences, etc. One could thus quickly conclude that the object of one’s critique should not be prisons per se, but the giant technological corporations that ensure that prison really is a detention facility for those who are dangerous to the system.

Civilized life, sedentarism, to live with an abnormally large number of unknown people cooped up in the city, the frustrations, the artificial needs, the seeking of upward mobility, “stress”, junk food that poisons the blood, and many other things are actions that merit a reaction. Some people manifest this reaction by disregarding the legal structures and seeking out illegal activities. But this all comes back to the principle of causality, to action / reaction. If you live in civilization, no doubt that you will be affected by this way of life. Although we have to say that we too detest human prisons, the physical place as well as the domineering people who work there and the quarrelsome prisoners. They’re awful places. But when we talk about prisons we just don’t mean human prisoners and jails, but also all other types of prisons and cages. Another question that we can bring up here: What prisons are we talking about abolishing? Many times those who call themselves “anti-prison anarchists” are only committed, in some cases, to rejecting and attacking the prisons that hold their comrades. But they feel animosity for rehabilitation centers because these go against their principles since they limit the “freedom” for which they fight so adamantly. Many vegans, freegans, animal liberationists, ecologists and others would agree that prisons are not just these places, but also cages where they keep animals captive, be it in circuses, laboratories, universities, and nurseries.

Those who oppose formal education would agree with us that you can’t just talk about prison, we shouldn’t just mention jail cells, but also classrooms.

Those who oppose salaried labor would be in agreement that not only should the jails, the prison cells, the cages, and the schools be condemned, but also factories. And we can also point out here those who oppose psychiatrists, asylums, vices, and maybe even our own minds. But also the totality of these things, the Great Cage itself: civilization.

I once saw a cartoon of a famous cartoonist very well known in Mexico about a man who came and went to work every day and somehow tolerated his asphyxiating daily routine. But suddenly he realized that he had wings, so he spread them and began to fly. He flew over the cars stuck in traffic, and over the crowds of people, showing them that he could go wherever he liked with his wings. Smiling he flew higher and higher, feeling truly free, shedding his suitcase and his clothes. But then suddenly he hit a fence and fell. He wanted to fly higher than the rest, thinking that there were no more fences that could hold him down but he found out the hard way that there were. That’s the Great Cage we know as civilization. So the lesson is: anyone who thinks that they are totally free only does so because they haven’t yet flown high enough to hit the bars of the Great Cage. Many anti-prison anarchists, but not all, suppose that, like the man in the cartoon, getting their buddies out of jail will make them free, and that’s where the struggle ends. Many perhaps think that the prisons are the main objective, but hopefully one day they will also notice the Great Cage itself.

<strong>XT: In some of your writings you critique the positions of Kaczynski. You deny his importance yet you acknowledge him as a predecessor to your own work. Do you think that you are being unfair in not granting him a prominent place in the anti-technology movement? Aside from the contexts being obviously different, what would you say is the main difference between your position and that of the imprisoned mathematician?</strong>

RS: We gave credit where credit was due when it was appropriate. Many groups that joined RS took much from Dr. Kaczynski and they stated so publicly. This was no big deal until 2012 when the editorial group, Último Reducto, began to criticize us, and so we started to realize that we didn’t really agree with the idea of a revolution against the techno-industrial system and other things. Thus, we devised our own ideas in this regard. As we said, we always acknowledge Freedom Club’s work and the analysis of Uncle Ted, but later we had to reject them, and that’s when we stopped talking about them. But if you ask us now if he had an influence on us, of course we’d admit it. The main difference between what Kaczynski and his acolytes propose and our own position is rather simple: we don’t wait for a “Great World Crisis” to start attacking the physical and moral structures of the techno-industrial system. We attack now because the future is uncertain. You can’t create a strategy based on assumptions, thinking that all will go according to plan and with assured victory. We stopped believing in that once we grasped the enormity of the system itself, its components and its vast reach on this planet and even outside of it. If civilization collapses tomorrow, or within 30 to 50 years, we’ll know that we waged a necessary war against it from our own individuality. It’s funny, but they call us “anarchists” within the “anti-civ” movement of the early 21st century, just as they called the first people who didn’t wait for the “right” conditions to plant bombs and assassinate people “anarchists” in the 19th century. These people had serious difficulties with“legal” anarchists who wanted to wait for “revolution”, as they were often rejected by the latter as apolitical criminals. In making a comparison between us and theorists who wait for an “anti-tech” revolution, the analogy seems to stick. This is what our published words and deeds seem to be indicating.

The second difference is that we have modeled ourselves and are inspired by the resistance of primitive nomadic hunter-gatherers. Those who currently constitute RS still have in our blood the warrior spirit of our ancestors. Of course, it’s obvious to us that we are civilized individuals, but we still heed the call of the wild, and we give ourselves over to the attack on all that is unnatural. This compared to the theories of Uncle Ted which failed to go farther than a comparison between techno-industrial and previous ancient societies. Basically it’s something very similar, but we have focused on what we have in our own context here, in ancient Mesoamerica.

<strong>XT: In the United States there are radical ecologists who support a “post-apocalyptic” hypothesis. Their analysis is based on the idea that techno-industrial society has reached its peak, and its fall is inevitable. Richard Duncan has spoken of “Olduvai theory” which posits that our current industrial civilization can only have a maximum life of one hundred years starting from 1930, placing its end around 2030. The transition seems to have started in 2007 when world per capita energy production began to shrink due to falling rates of fossil fuel energy extraction, while at the same time demand increases due to the increase in population. This will cause a catastrophic economic and social collapse in the coming years, and little by little the human population will be reduced back to numbers seen in previous times. If Duncan’s hypothesis is correct, why act now instead of just waiting? And at the moment of acting, aren’t you just presenting yourselves as some sort of vanguard?</strong>

RS: Personally we don’t know how long the structures that support civilization on its decadent path will last. We can read much concerning various existing theories but still we’ll be left waiting for the appointed prophetic year in which maybe it’ll all end. But either way, all that the learned can propose are theories.

The here and now denotes all that is evil. People rot because they are content with conformism, a herd mentality, and technological “advances”. There are the technological advances invading our lives more and more and the ever- worsening economy. There are social explosions taking place everywhere you turn. Artificial reality consumes us, and it looks like things will explode sooner or later. As individualists we have decided to take the rest of our lives into our own hands and not wait for the crisis to happen. Why? Because we are already living it. We don’t want to wait because Nature encourages us to return the blows that it has received right now.

We’ll share a story with you. One night in August 2011, a section of the group Its broke into the Cinvestav of Irapuato, Guanajuato. We jumped the fence and we scaled the roof of the National Genome and Biotechnology Laboratory.

From above we could see the guard at his post, speaking on the phone while we watched him hooded from the darkness. We walked to the place where they did tests. I was surprised to find in one of the rooms a large plant that was hooked up to cables so that various computers could monitor it. The only thing that I felt at that moment was disgust and the immense desire to destroy everything in that place. I saw the real manner in which technology tries to subjugate wild nature. Technology tries to obtain more information from nature under the scientific yoke, subjugating it and making it artificial. Do you think we can just sit back and wait until everything is in place for the system to fall, even when we see these horrid indicators among us even now? NO. And what if that supposed collapse doesn’t happen in 2030? We’ll put our faith in some other convincing theorist who asks that we wait until 2100? NOT THIS EITHER.

As for what you say concerning a vanguard, we don’t think we are or ever will be one. We have been a realist alternative to those who look to us, but our intention is not to guide on the straight and narrow those who consider themselves critical of the technological system. We have explained our motives from the beginning only because it seemed appropriate for us to do so, and that’s it. We don’t want to create a movement or anything like that. The only vanguard that exists here are the sincere acts of people who value nature and who have decided to take the extremist defense of wild nature to its logical conclusion. That’s all. There is no group behind any of this, or leading it.

<strong>XT: There are groups in the Southern Cone that seem to be echoing many of the same positions. Don’t you think they are franchising your ideas down there?</strong>

RS: Not at all. If those people are publishing our ideas, they have reasons that only they know. And as you say, what we are defending here is an open PROPOSITION for those who would like to take it up. Intelligent people who would like to take up some of our ideas and methods, if they are sincere, will always be looked upon in a good light by the various factions of RS.

<strong>XT: The historian Eric Hobsbawn considered the Luddite Movement as a form of “collective negotiation by uprising”, a tactic that had been used since the Restoration in Great Britain. This was the case since mass demonstrations were impractical due to the layout of factories throughout the country. Don’t you think that this anti-technological militancy serves as an overture to enact reforms favoring economic deceleration that the State must enact if it wants to continue to govern? Aren’t you doing the work of the State for it even if unwillingly?</strong>

RS: We can see today that there are growing criticisms of technology coming from many sources. There are many people who are starting to realize that the current system is rotten. So the inevitable question arises: Is this a beneficial development for the war against the technological system? If the criticisms entail refusing to negotiate with the system, this would be positive indeed. But looking at the situation we realize that the majority of criticisms of technology have a reformist slant to them. For example, they’ll say things like, “technology is making us less social and limiting interpersonal contact, it’s good if we limit its use,” “sedentary life in civilization causes a lot of health problems, we should work out more,” “we’re surrounded by artificiality and I can’t stand life in the city, let’s go live in the country,” “garbage is polluting the oceans, we should buy more environmentally-friendly products,” “technology isn’t the problem, it’s how you use it, etc,” These supposed criticisms are over negotiable things, and one could even consider them proposed measures that allow the reform of the system, as well as its strengthening and growth. But what if instead we said things like, “technology is the problem, let’s light some tech company on fire with everyone inside,” “civilization is dangerously expanding and destroying what’s left of nature in its path in the process, let’s assassinate the chief engineer of a major project,” “this idiotic society has laws that allow the machine to keep running, these are part of the problem, let’s go ahead and detonate an explosive in a public place of symbolic importance,” etc. These kinds of extremist criticisms are non-negotiable, and these are the ones we adhere to. Thus, in responding to your question, we find it difficult to believe that the system can use these ideas and praxis for reformist ends, or that these result in a means by which the system can propagate itself.

<strong>XT: To go up against the massive plot that is contemporary society is a titanic task. There are elevated chances that you could lose your life or end up in a jail cell for the rest of your lives. Why then assume defeatism as the final course of action? Don’t you see that this is akin to martyrdom?</strong>

RS: Pessimism seized us when the scales dropped from our eyes and we realized that it would be impossible to destroy the entire technological system from our individualist perspective. We do not aspire to its total destruction. This would entail convincing and leading the stupid masses at some point. We would rather work for destabilization. We would like it if the entire technological system would fall, but that’s something that we are not capable of carrying out. Último Reducto has painted us as defeatists, but we would say that this is in the eye of the beholder. We are pessimistic toward the point of view that a select group of persons can help to destroy the system through their actions, which is Último Reducto’s position. But we are not pessimists because we have surrendered. We will keep doing what we do as long as our strength and circumstances permit us to do so.

And that’s because there’s no other real thing to aspire to. We’d be fooling ourselves if we said that we are going to bring the whole megamachine down. That’s not what we want to do. We aren’t martyrs either. We’re only embarked on a mission of self-defense, to defend nature from that which opposes it, without concerning ourselves with what is to be won in the future. Nothing that could potentially happen interests us. The extremist war against the technological system should be disinterested, without expecting a positive outcome, nourished by sincere acts of reverence for and in defense of wild nature. That’s what guides us. Responding to threats is a biological need of warriors, and we behave accordingly.

<strong>XT: Wouldn’t it be better to publicly debate this position with different societal actors and let the people decide what will be their fate?</strong>

RS: The people would take the path that most suits them, namely the path of least resistance, while positions that criticize civilization are on the table so that they can decide whether to adhere to them or not. Our position is like a coin tossed in the air over this table. Whoever considers himself capable and with the right amount of guile to take it up will do so. We don’t want our tendency to be the “most coherent” among others. It’s the position we defend and that’s it.

<strong>XT: There is an issue of the U.S. magazine Green Anarchy that does a comparative study between primitivists in a group in Oregon and the agrarian communist experiment of Pol Pot in Cambodia which is entitled, “Did the Khmer Rouge practice primitivism?” Don’t you think that there is a certain continuity between your positions and those of the Khmer Rouge, with the obvious exception of the latter trying to construct a State? What would be the difference between your positions and the forced agrarian policies and primitivism that drove the Communist Party of Kampuchea at that time?</strong>

RS: What the leader of the Khmer Rouge led in Cambodia in those years was a Maoist dictatorship. It was communalism inspired by the ancient agrarian modes of life of the Khmers, the original people of that country. What most calls our attention in that period was the collapse of the infrastructure of civilization. Money ceased to exist, the schools and the markets closed, and thus they sought to transform the country into a self-sufficient extreme agrarian state. But in order for all of the country to cooperate in this endeavor and impose this way of life, large sectors of the population had to be forced to do so.

We don’t know how anyone can see continuity between our position and theirs. It wasn’t even primitivism, to tell the truth, if by “primitivism” we mean to take up again a form of life close to that of our hunter-gatherer nomadic ancestors, and not the way of life of the peasantry before the Industrial Revolution. A major difference between RS and Pol Pot is that we don’t want to force anyone to return to ancient lifeways. The people are stupid and they love to live in their modern shit. Only those few who reject civilization and go to live isolated on the mountain should be respected. We do NOT advocate communal life either before or after the collapse of the system.

<strong>XT: Kevin Tucker is another member of the inner circle of the English-speaking primitivists. He advocates a position called, “primal war”. This is a carbon copy of “social war”, posited by Johann Most and has spread among informal groups. Does your positing the warlike character of the Teochichimecas and Chichimecas, as well as your descriptions of the Mixton War, seek historical precedent for your acts? Is there any connection between Tucker’s positions and your own?</strong>

RS: To be honest we haven’t read much on Tucker’s positions, we only know that he is one of Zerzan’s colleagues, and that he was harassed by the FBI on the suspicion that he knew something about the actions of ALF/ELF. Either way, considering this question we would like to take the opportunity to clarify something that hasn’t been properly understood or something that perhaps we haven’t communicated clearly enough.

We in RS recognize and remember the Mixton and Chichimeca Wars as historical references SOLELY for the purpose of showing examples of group defense of ancient lifeways, beliefs, and places on the part of savage warriors. And some may think that, in mentioning these wars, we want to repeat these historical events in the 21st century. Maybe some thought erroneously that we really do advocate ethnic indigenous people rising up as one, or rather that they rebel and reenact what had previously been done, but that’s not the case either.

In studying these savage uprisings specifically, we felt that we had a historical foundation that linked us to the genuine extremist defense of wild nature in these areas. You could see that the indigenous Teochichimecas here did not surrender either to indigenous Mesoamerican civilization or the European one. They kept their fighting spirit, they defended their primitive origins and by extension their beliefs tied deeply to nature, which were considered pagan and thus punished by the Catholic Church. They were known for their “cruelty”, their indiscriminate attacks against soldiers, allied Indians, blacks, mulattoes, women, children, etc. Their nomadic or semi-nomadic life made them difficult to pin down, and the craggy mountains were their best hiding places. Nature hid them before and after the battle, their relationship with nature was totally developed in places like deserts, forests, or semi-deserts which the Spanish said no one could possibly survive in. We have learned about these things both from archeological and anthropological research, as well as from the elders of certain ethnic groups that still live up in the highlands, and these things fill us with pride, and we claim them as our inspiration. The souls of our worthy ancestors have seized our minds and bodies, and it is now time, today, to continue the conflict against civilization and all that would subjugate us.

<strong>XT: So social war is the same as primal war?</strong>

RS: Social war is a term embedded in and taken up by many insurrectionary anarchists, which is very much in fashion now. We in RS are in an individualist war, planned, unbound, and executed by us against a variety of targets that are at the same time real and/or represent modernity, technology, civilization, artificiality, progressivism, and humanism. The terms seem the same, you have read about the call to primal war and posit that there is a similarity between this and social war, and I guess in that you may be right. I can’t give a concrete response regarding something that we have not proposed and wouldn’t even know the details of.

<strong>XT: In a similar vein, in some of your writings we have read you criticizing anarchists for their hope for a future free society, but you give a millenarist character to wild nature. You demonstrate this in such archeological studies as “The Place of the Seven Caves” (Chicomoztok): aren’t you falling into the exact same error that you criticize? What’s the difference? Aren’t both sides pursuing an idyllic world which neither has experienced? Isn’t it a remnant of Christianity to seek redemption in an ideal world?</strong>

RS: We don’t believe in or have faith in a future society. We don’t hope to see that “Armageddon” where nature will destroy the evil of civilization. We don’t believe in any of this. If this were not the case, we would be in no position to criticize the anarchists who believe in a “better” future, since we would be advocating the same thing with some noticeable differences.

We don’t know if there will be a global collapse of the system one day. The experts say that there will be, but we cannot know for certain. It could be the case and nature will rise from the ruins. But it could be that the system is always one step ahead of things, and could become self-sufficient and repair itself with ease. As we said, we don’t know the future. We would like to, but the reality is otherwise. Chicomoztok is only a look to the past, in the codex in which we can see and interpret graphically the life that our ancestors led. We see how they used friction to create fire. We see how various tribes gathered in their respective caves. We see the fruits that they gathered, the fauna that lived around them, the hunt, their clothing, skins, jewelry, feathers, etc. There are even symbols of war. There are many symbols in that codex that seemed important and thus we adopted them, for it is a sort of window into the life of our ancestors when communing with nature.

It’s a mythical and unknowable place, so why do many of our factions sign that they are supposedly writing from Chicomoztok? When they sign their communiqués that way, it’s to mock the authorities since they can’t find us and we are in a place that doesn’t have an exact location, you see?

To clarify things, we cite here the opening of the introduction to our work, “The Place of the Seven Caves”, which we recommend be read in its entirety:

“In Wild Reaction, we understand Chicomoztok as that place isolated from civilization, the destination of many diverse savage nomad tribes, which represent the wild and full life that our ancestors enjoyed before they were convinced to adopt sedentary life.:

It is a look to the past which tends toward regression, and to that which we have been losing little by little.

It symbolizes our adherence to our primitive past and by extension to the extreme defense of wild nature, the first fire that initiates individual and group conflict against that which represents artificiality and progress.”

Many investigators have attempted to find that place called “the Seven Caves,” but until now it has been lost in a region that centuries ago constituted what is now known as the “Gran Chichimeca.” That’s a dark and shadowy place in which hides a savage essence, in which dwells a story never told before, the memory of innumerable lives, adventures and conflicts which the winter took away along with the ashes of the indigenous Teochichimecas. This is the place that the factions of RS remember in a pagan manner while we hide in plain sight, or in secrecy and terrorist anonymity.

<strong>XT: On this and returning to the publication Green Anarchy, historian John Zerzan is one of the important figures in primitivism. His positions on the negative dialectic though daring don’t lose any impeccability in their construction. What is your opinion of this historian, focusing on his positions and not on his life? What is your opinion concerning the use of language and arithmetic as tools for inter-species domination? Do you consider any of these arguments viable?</strong>

RS: In the past years, Zerzan has become one of the most “radical” theorists in U.S. primitivist circles. For us, however, he is a romantic, an optimist, and politically correct in the worst sense of the term. His positions have caused quite a stir and resulted in outright condemnation from some, especially those touching upon the theme of language.

Just recently in an interview with the magazine, Vice, he said the following to a question concerning language and domination:

“I have to say this is the most speculative thing that I’ve written about. I’m not abandoning the argument, and I try to make a case for questioning symbolic activity, even including language, but it’s much more clear in terms of time, and numbers, and art. What makes it so speculative is that no one knows when speech started. There’s no way to prove it.” As you can see, Zerzan isn’t really even sure of what he had posited many years ago.

We aren’t anthropologists who specialize in the theme of linguistics, and to tell the truth we aren’t familiar with that debate. It seems to us to be a bit petty, to be honest. Even so, we recently wrote something on this topic in an essay entitled, “Nietzsche and the actuality of his criticism of scientism”:

“The modern human is obligated to live in society, having to contend closely with his fellow man. From this through language comes law that upholds the social order, so that man may live in peace within society without entering into conflict with others. This arrangement necessitates such concepts as ‘truth’ and the ‘lie’. These designations concerning truth and falsehood are invented by rational man and are ascribed with certain validity, though they are merely anthropomorphic fantasies.”

Language in this (post)modern age has brought forth in anthropomorphic reason a scientism that tends towards artificial human progress, and for sure this attacks wild nature. The other variants of this postmodernism such as those found in art, language, arithmetic, etc. are the result of the complexity of civilization. They are tools which the system uses to make sense of all those things for which it does not have an exact or reasonable answer. These tools are only phantoms since in real life, or rather in the realm of nature, they don’t exist. Anthropomorphic thinking is nothing to the universe, but even so humans seek to falsely place themselves at the center of all things.

<strong>XT: In Mexico, do groups exists that choose voluntary isolation as happens in Amazonas and whose existence are on the margins of Western society, which is awfully close to some of the propositions of anarchism?</strong>

RS: The only groups that we are aware of that live in isolation are the Raramuris and the Wixarika, even if these are few. They inhabit the deserts and semi-deserts of northwest Mexico, even though we don’t doubt that there are others. These groups live a very simple life, they are semi-nomadic and they gather their food in the arid northern lands of ancient Mesoamerica as their Teochichimeca ancestors did. They hunt some animals and even have very unique beliefs, though it bears mentioning that these are often mixed with Catholicism. Nevertheless, it is inspiring to know that they have maintained the same perception of things that their remote and primitive ancestors had.

And quickly comparing their lives with the anarchism you are asking about, I see few similarities. First of all, there is in these ethnic groups an authority figure that the rest of the people follow, though not merely as an unjust authority. It could be the strongest or bravest man or the shaman. But it’s not up for dispute that there is an authority figure. That’s one thing that many anarchists don’t approve of: those who refuse any authority that seeks to govern since in their mind it might try to “impose” something on them.

Secondly, the people in these groups have a specific role to carry out, they have hierarchy. It may be that men have to work more in the hunting season, or it could be that women work more in the times of nomadic gathering. Or it could be that both work equally in the time of harvest if as semi-nomads they have planted something. This is all to say that there is no equality. The division of labor is considered acceptable and the role that each individual carries out is what makes the group stable and without major conflicts. These are their customs, this is how they have survived from time immemorial, Thus, one cannot say that their life is similar to anarchism since one of the qualities of the latter is equality, and this is not compatible with the lives of these indigenous groups.

Thirdly, anarchism pushes atheism, that is, not positing gods or divinities that exist above an individual. In contrast, these groups of semi-nomads (as we indicated) have a firm belief in natural divinities and spirits that are much more powerful than they are. Making gods or believing in a spiritual authority from which all emanates is something totally contrary to anarchism, or am I wrong?

Fourthly, it is the case that these societies do not have a state or police force. They are too small for someone to control them like that or for someone to assume that sort of responsibility. There are no judges either, but if the occasion arises that someone must be punished, the elders are the ones who carry it out or who indicate what would be the suitable punishment for the evil doer according to their traditions and customs. And while no one gets imprisoned, there are punishments.

Fifthly, one of the premises of anarchism is that we are all equal, that we should all have the same opportunities, and free association is one of the pillars of the construction of a “new tomorrow”. From our ecoextremist point of view, all of this is absurd. Equality does not exist, we are all different and we don’t all have the same opportunities. We accept free association not to build a new and better world, but in order to develop ourselves individually within our circle of allies and not with strange or unknown people. Anarchism’s position is very humanist and falls within the suffocating parameters of being Western. These values indicate a tendency toward progress within the human being, and thus toward the progress of civilization, even if it is one that is “freer,” “more just,” “more compassionate,” etc. All of this is still garbage. We should point out that this is our opinion concerning anarchism; anarchy, well, that’s a different story. This is how it was described by one of the most representative theorists of this anarchic tendency, Gustavo Rodriguez, when he stated the following in an interview:

“We don’t believe in miracles, even less in ‘utopian societies’. Thus, we don’t busy ourselves in trying to ‘improve’ the image of that intangible product known as ‘Utopia’. We are convinced that ‘anarchist society’ won’t suddenly materialize first thing tomorrow. To be honest, we are pretty sure that it will never materialize. But this doesn’t bother us in the least.”

“For us Anarchy is not only possible but it materializes in an ephemeral manner every time there is a successful expropriation. It is constituted in those little moments in which the night is illuminated by refractory flames. It is confirmed in every jail break, it is verified by every instance of physical elimination of our enemies.”

Although we digress a bit from the main subject at hand, I will continue. The main point is that these isolated societies do not have a moral code similar to that of anarchism. So as stated in the second point they do not have equal opportunity, and that is something that is incompatible with what anarchism proposes. I think that if you wanted to find a good comparison with another system that aligns better with the positions, values, and practice of anarchism, you would need to have recourse to the communities of free spirits, hippies, peasants, and others who have went off by themselves to live a more autonomous or sustainable life. But with the small societies in voluntary isolation there’s really no comparison there. Though, after discussing all of that, my own question would be: what does anarchism refer to then? For there seem to be infinite meanings and interpretations over which even the anarchists themselves have little control.

<strong>XT: It’s interesting that you bring up concerning the groups of voluntary isolation in Mexico, but what do you think of the anti-development theories of Miguel Amorós?</strong>

RS: Amorós’s anti-development propositions are interesting in terms of the megamachine, not only describing its economic aspects but also its civilizing elements. They describe quite well what modern progress has ended in, perverting ecosystems and how it is that population growth has invaded our natural surroundings.

However, we must state that there are things that didn’t really convince us in Amorós’s book, “Anti-development perspectives” in which he stated: “the salvation of our age depends upon the generalization of [anti-developmentalism] as a determined form of consciousness.”

“Salvation of our age?” Maybe the above-mentioned theorist believes that one day in the distant future, when his ideas are “generalized”, the survivors will somehow “save” the age from harmful development, which seems to fall again into the vague category of “revolution”. And we’re not just speaking off the cuff here. The “friend” of the Friends of Ludd proposes a “new type of revolution”.

It should be repeated that his critique is good and in that regard it draws attention to the idea that he hints at when writing against work and consumption, a necessary negation considering his anti-development ideas. What we are not in agreement with is when he proposes a perennial imaginary scenario about a possible “revolution”.

Is it possible for the critique to remain in motion, the negation of all that exists, and the drive that incites the individualist to take the reins of his own life, stealing it and appropriating it, without wanting something more transcendent, like a “revolution”?

<strong>XT: Almorós’s position for you is useful but you disagree adamantly concerning the positing of a future that undoubtedly implies a “revolution” of a new type. One thing we’ve never read about is your opinion on how other sectors of society are affected. You have no opinion on sexual preference, disabled people, indigenous people in struggle, political prisoners, etc. Don’t you think that in focusing your criticisms on technological development, you are leaving behind a myriad of conflicts and submitting to the technological mindset at the same time in that you are becoming “specialists” in a manner of speaking which is of value to contemporary society?</strong>

RS: That’s a good question. Hold on to your hat because you are definitely not going to like our answer.

On “indigenous people in struggle,” as you have written, we have addressed this to the “Destroy the Prisons” group: We recognize the resistance of the Purepechas in defending and dying for the forests of Michoacán. We admire the rebellious Huichols who oppose with all of their might the development of mines in San Luis Potosí. We support the Chichimecas who resist the Christianizing of their native beliefs in Guanajuato. We back up the Mixtecos who reject at all costs the medicine of the city and prefer to continue to keep healing themselves with plants that they gather in the mountains of Oaxaca at the risk of being regarded as witches. We support the decision of the Kilwa who prefer extinction to being absorbed by Western life. We exalt the resistance that distinguishes some Raramuris as semi- nomads detached from civilization in the deserts of Chihuahua. The struggle against progress and in defense of the Earth encompasses indigenous people who resist in their homelands, as well as civilized people in the cities committing acts of sabotage and terrorism against that same progress. For the struggle in defense of Nature is not one alone. The strategy, contexts, situations, and risks all vary.

As for “political prisoners”, there’s not much to say. If we don’t share their political positions and activism, we find no reason to defend them. Those who are in the can for those activities have their own circle of supporters, those people can take care of them while in prison. It should be pointed out that RS does not have anyone imprisoned for anything related directly to our activities, and truth be told we’re proud to be able to say that. For those jealous anarchists who we know full well criticize us, we ask: how many people in prison does RS have? None. How many imprisoned anarchists are there? A lot. That speaks much to how careful we are in terms of security, and that in the face of a recent series of actions and robberies that we carried out (Note: this refers to the counteroffensive of April 2015). We’ve always come out unscathed from these due to our boldness and discretion. This isn’t arrogance, it’s the reality. People who can accept that, great, but those who can’t can continue with their sniveling and sterile criticism.

Some time ago, the Nocturnal Hunter Faction of RS detonated an explosive at the Mexican Telethon Foundation, over there in the municipality of Tlalnepantla in the State of Mexico. The butane pipe explosive exploded in the entrance of that place destroying the glass that protected a bunch of wheelchairs for kids, leaving them all burned. In its communiqué, the faction stated the following:

“The ‘Teletón Foundation’, is also an agency along with the two most prestigious universities in Mexico (UNAM and ITESM), in charge of the development of technological and scientific innovation with therapeutic purposes, to say, together they completely adhere to the idea of civilized progress, to make sure this system follows its course. Surely many will ask: And what harm is caused by the existence of these types of charities for disabled people? Perhaps the questioners have not taken into account that the system always dresses as a “well intentioned nun” to continue perpetuating itself. Complete technology will always have the same purpose in whichever of its forms, whether therapeutic or weaponizing, educational or of massive destruction, medicinal or poisonous. And that purpose is to continue existing over wild nature, because of this our attack.

Without more explanations: We are not Christians, nor do we characterize nobility, we do not seek nor defend charity from anyone or with anyone!”

Based on this attack many “Zerzanians” branded us as cruel, inhuman, even to the point of comparing us to ISIS, something that instead of bothering us, made us laugh out loud. And that’s because many “gringo primitivists” over there are so politically correct, so romanticist when it comes to their embedded image of the “noble savage”, that they are deeply scandalized when “Mexican” critics of the technological system do these sorts of things. We couldn’t care less about disabled people. Like persons without disabilities, they form part of the same complex system, and we attack their institutions regardless of if they are missing limbs or if they are sick or not. Yeah we did it, and we’ll keep doing it, regardless of what people think. Sexual orientation is a big thing now, the defenders of the rights of homosexuals and the rest of those people. They’ve won their struggle that they’ve been waging for years now and they can marry legally like everyone else. They can have jobs and even top level jobs, they can get medical attention if they are infected after some wild party, they can adopt kids, etc. Their struggle has meant that they can now integrate into society (with all of its prejudice) and be another cog in the machine. The same is the case for other previously vulnerable groups: feminists wanted gender equality, now they can be exploited by employers just like their husbands, fathers, and sons. Blacks can now hold important positions even in government (just like that bloodthirsty Obama!) which they were excluded from just 50 years ago; now they form part of the dirty system. It’s the same thing that happens with these disabled people. If we put in the same room an average man, a black man, a woman, a disabled person, a gay man, and an animal rights activist, you will see that they all have distinct personalities, thoughts, morals, abilities, etc. but one thing unites them. Every one of them has a role to play in society, and that’s to uphold the integrity of the system and make sure that it keeps on going. For us they are perhaps different but perhaps not, for we see one general rule followed here, and that is the HUMAN (such as it is) expressly contributes to the destruction of wild nature. His civilization is destroying all in its path, his technology is turning everything more and more mechanical and his science subjugates that which is natural and turns it artificial. We don’t focus on the problems of people, or on the problems of one sector in particular. I think that there are people who see, worry about, and fight on behalf of lesser causes, such as obtaining “rights”, new laws, reforms, support for oppressed groups, etc. That’s their specialty, not ours. We focus on the technological system, on civilization, for this is the root of all evils that besiege us as a species, the rest are symptoms of the real problem.

<strong>XT: In truth we have to agree to disagree (strongly) on these last points, from the way you tackle them to your opinion about oppressed groups. But let’s switch gears a bit and talk about the current low intensity war in Mexico centered around narcotrafficking. The escape of Chapo Guzman is clearly indicative of the complicity of some authorities with those elements. What’s your opinion on narcotrafficking?</strong>

RS: You know, Mexico is a steaming pile of shit. It’s conflicted, corrupt, and prostituted to the highest bidder, treacherous, run down, and even though there are people who say that there are “good things” about it, we see more bad things than good to be honest. Really we can’t even know if there person who was imprisoned in that maximum security prison and who escaped was actually Chapo Guzman, or an impostor. That’s for starters. Lies piled upon lies are daily fare here. Personally, I don’t trust anything that the media blabbers about, every one of them is blowing shit out of their ass. That there is a low intensity war going on, that’s for sure. But you can speak of this just not in terms of narcotrafficking, there are also groups, politicians, private interests, etc.

Drug trafficking continues because people consume a great quantity of narcotics, since city life has totally corrupted our species. They seek happiness in certain substances that only cause health problems. It’s a profitable business: as long as there are addicts, business is booming. But you know what? You’re going to say that I sound like a broken record, but the problem isn’t the addicts or the dealers, not the hired guns who kill defending their turf, nor the chemists who make the product, nor the politicians who permit the whole business, nor the drug lords who get rich off it all. The problem is civilization itself. And as long as the Great Cage exists, all of these problems, from narcotrafficking to corruption to prostitution to human and organ trafficking to pediophilia to rape and all of the other horrible things that we all know as those immersed in artificial reality will continue to exist as well.

Yes, it’s sad that entire families have to abandon their homes because of violence. It’s outrageous that one of your family members ends up being killed in the crossfire between drug cartel assassins and the Marines. It’s disturbing that the situation that we are living in Mexico is getting worse and more and more cynical by the day. But narcotrafficking and all of the things that go with it have only one cause, and that is civilization.

<strong>XT: That is an interesting point. To close, Mexico is living through a turbulent period, with an important social mobilization taking place. How do you see the future of this place? Are we getting close to a popular uprising?</strong>

RS: For a while we’ve been hearing about there being a popular uprising. There was one supposedly in Oaxaca in 2006, or a couple of years ago there was talk among experts of the right conditions for one in Michoacán. Even though this latter one was a bit different from what happened in Oaxaca, confrontation there died down gradually as the defense units started working with the government, whatever. They said 2010 would be the year, then 2012. After the disappearance of the students of Ayotzinapa there was a tense atmosphere in Guerrero as well as in the center and southern regions of the country. But what has happened up until now? Business as usual, injustices and massacres as in the past forty years. Repression of protesters and the indignant response to this repression… like a vicious circle, a circle in which the State comes out the winner. A large scale popular uprising? Yeah, whatever.

More to the point, two RS factions saw an opportunity to unleash a wave of violence and to inflict direct damage at the heart of Mexico City. On November 20th of last year, on the anniversary of the Mexican “Revolution”, there was a demonstration demanding justice for the 43 students who disappeared in Guerrero. Tensions were high and confrontation was a given. The “Blood and Flame” and “War Dance” Factions of RS were in attendance, with every intention of instigating a confrontation between police and protesters. Members of these factions stated that they saw plain clothes police agent provocateurs infiltrating the anarchist Black Bloc. RS infiltrated their ranks and began the provocation. There was a moment where, if the momentum had continued, the people would have taken the National Palace, at which point the military police would have opened fire on those folks. That would have been the precise moment to return fire and escalate the conflict, deepening the war against civilization. We should clarify that, as always, RS doesn’t take all of the credit, there were many hooded folks and common people in various groups who were in the thick of it, that’s true. Even though what the factions wanted at that moment didn’t come to pass, the disturbance worried the government greatly.

In their communiqué, the factions stated:

“One of our objectives on the path to destabilization is to provoke violent confrontations so that guards open fire against the citizenry and the latter decide to defend themselves, thus escalating the conflict. ‘For when the crisis becomes more acute, it’s better to push it along and make it worse…’

As we have written previously, RS is not a group that either ‘understands’ or ‘respects’ the masses. We don’t participate in demonstrations to express “solidarity”, not to ask for ‘peace’ and ‘justice’. The RS factions want to escalate them and see this system and this civilization burn and fall due to the problems of those who constitute it.”


[11] This past summer, on a blog called El Tlatol, the details of which we are writing were publicly exposed. Later, the Carbon Ink Groupuscule of Ediciones Aborigen (which in turn has joined RS in recent months), published a printed work emphasizing this, entitled “Respuesta Indirecta” [Indirect Response], which we recommend reading.

[12] Point 4 of the text “Algunos comentarios en referencia a los comunicados de Individualidades tendiendo a lo salvaje” [Some comments in reference to the communiques from Individualists Tending toward the Wild] by Último Reducto, January 8, 2012.

[13] In ITS’ sixth communique point II, we make it clear by the following:<br>“Obviously, we continue to defend the criticism of the term ‘revolution-revolutionary’, without a doubt.<br><br>Therefore:<br>-The so called ‘revolution’ which many are waging on, perverts human nature because it always tends to reform the system.<br>-The ‘revolution’, is a blind faith that many want to see achieved, if they do not succeed in their goals (which they have never reached) their efforts will be in vain, and everything, absolutely everything for which they fought will collapse, such efforts resulting as futile.<br>-The ‘revolution’ is a leftist concept.<br>-Many leftists want to make their aims and/or approaches something so profound that they exaggerate, wander and come to limits outside of reality. There are many examples: ‘the destruction of capitalism’, ‘a world without states or borders’, ‘a planet without animal exploitation’, ‘world peace’ and among these, the so called ‘anti-technological revolution’.“

[14] Strategy, paragraph 181, Industrial Society and Its Future by FC, Ediciones Isumatag, 2011.<br>[transl. all excerpts of ISAIF in the present english translation were taken from Technological Slavery, Feral House, 2012.]

[15] Strategy, paragraph 182, Industrial Society and Its Future by FC, Ediciones Isumatag, 2011.

[16] “The revolution must be international and worldwide. It cannot be carried out on a nation-by-nation basis. (…) True, THERE IS NO ASSURANCE (uppercase by RS) that the industrial system can be destroyed at approximately the same time all over the world, and it is even conceivable that the attempt to overthrow the system could lead instead to the domination of the system by dictators. That is a risk that has to be taken.” Strategy, paragraph 195, Industrial Society and Its Future by FC. Ediciones Isumatag 2011.

[17] “The IMF’s response to the global financial crisis”, official website of the International Monetary Fund (imf.org), September 30, 2014.

[18] “The five regions of the European Union with the most unemployment are Spanish”, Diario ABC, April 16, 2014.

[19] “SMEs disappear because of family crisis”, El Universal, March 28, 2011.<br>“Nearly 500,000 companies have disappeared since the crisis began,” Razón, March 30, 2011.

[20] “Wars, conflicts, terrorism, political crisis: 70 hot spots on the planet” El confidencial, March 8, 2014.

[21] “The stock markets of Southeast Asia down because of China”, América Económica, June 24, 2013.

[22] “Lagarde warns risk of recession in Europe”, El Universal, October 9, 2014.

[23] “Drought in the Amazon increases fears about global warming”, BBC, February 4, 2011.

[24] “Urbanization threaten protected areas”, 24 hours, 4 January 2012.

[25] “An increase of 57% of cancer globally announce a humanitarian disaster”, CNN, February 4, 2014.

[26] “The fear of the Ebola threat extends throughout America and Europe”, El Tiempo, October 12, 2014.

[27] Strategy, paragraph 188 of Industrial Society and Its Future by FC. Ediciones Isumatag, 2011.

[28] “A new kind of society cannot be designed on paper. That is, you cannot plan out a new form of society in advance, then set it up and expect it to function as it was designed to do.” Some Principles of History, paragraph 104 “Industrial Society and Its Future” by FC. Ediciones Isumatag 2011.

[29] Point 8 of the text “Some comments in reference to the communiques from Individualists Tending toward the Wild” by Último Reducto. January 8, 2012.

[30] “Some ideas about the present and the future”, Ediciones Isumatag, October 6, 2014.

[31] Strategy, paragraph 206, Industrial Society and Its Future by FC. Ediciones Isumatag 2011.

[32] The blogs and magazines best known are: “Nature“, “Vice Magazine“, “Wired“, “The Guardian News“, “Vocativ“, “American Scientist“, “Proceso“, “Carthaginensia” (research publication), among others.

[33] In addition to the Spanish language, translations to English, Italian, French, Portuguese, Greek, Catalan, Polish, Turkish and Croatian can be found on the web.

[34] The book was edited by Matar o Morir Ediciones and is a compilation of all the communiques of ITS and RS. It was published this year on November 7, and is available on the anarchist blog Contrainfo.

[35] Other books that have been released that we are aware: Comunicati Atenttativi published by Verein von Egoisten Ed is a compilation of Italian translations of the communiques of ITS. The Collected Communiqués of Individualists Tending Toward the Wild edited by War on Society, is a compilation of English translations of the communiques of ITS. ¡Que se ilumine la noche! Génesis, desarrollo y auge de la Tendencia Informal Anarquista published by Black International Editions includes an ITS interview.

[36] “Conductas Incivilizadas” (CI) is how they sign, in their communique released this year (2014) in November, from Buenos Aires, claiming responsibility for various bomb threats to universities and airports as well as an unsuccessful arson attack on an electrical substation. https://waronsociety.noblogs.org/?p=9269

[37] First communique of Wild Reaction, Point V. August 14, 2014.

[38] Strategy, paragraph 185, Industrial Society and Its Future by FC. Ediciones Isumatag 2011.

[39] Sixth communique by Individualists Tending towards the Wild. January 28, 2012.