A translator acts as a bridge across cultures by importing or exporting not only books but also concepts and fresh ideas across distant countries. Most importantly, however, the translator is capable of transferring new innovations across linguistic and political boundaries; innovations that might be scientotechnological, artistical, philosophical, or political - the latter category being of special interest to revolutionaries.
The proletarian struggle, especially its anarchocommunist and autonomist currents, is internationalist because the proletariat confronts the same cruel exploitation everywhere. Thus, revolutionaries need to escape the language boundaries in order to reach the minds of comrades in different places. Translation of new revolutionary innovations becomes even more important in a world where the bourgoisie is being globalized, which results in easy propagation of new security measures across the states.
It is necessary to put more effort in translating in as many languages as possible revolutionary, anarchist, and autonomist literature, but also news from the street and briefings on imprisoned comrades. Translations into languages spoken by immigrant communities is also very important. While some languages might seem more popular than others, all are important.
Some texts are too large to be translated by a single working comrade. Therefore, it would be a good idea to set up anonymous wikis on the internet and put the original text there, allowing any visitor to translate from a single word to whole chapters. This way, everyone will be able to contribute something, no matter their free time. A well-built wiki software package can be found at
![](/img/extlink.gif)
Teaching foreign languages can also be organized in squats and other social centres used by our movement. Some squats around the world already organize free lessons for various languages, and this trend should continue.
Comments
Hide the following 5 comments
?
11.06.2009 00:27
sled
always
11.06.2009 00:49
Not
to Not
11.06.2009 12:01
Hmmm....I'm not sure the world can be divided up quite so simply as you suggest: between a rich class who are property owning, and a proletarian one that want to share everything. If only it was that black and white! I think there are plenty of so-called proletarians who believe just as firmly in private property, for whatever reason. The whole idea of a 'property-owning democracy' as Thatcher put it, managed to seduce a huge amount of people: just look at how many former council tenants took up the right-to-buy scheme. Today, in property-obsessed Britain there is a mad scramble to get on the property ladder which cuts across social classes. Of course, if you are right at the bottom, you are much less likely to own property. Yet it is an aspiration that is inculcated in many people and which makes distinctions such as the ones you used increasingly blurry.
tree frog
false consciousness
11.06.2009 21:54
Decembrist
Long time from May til December
14.06.2009 18:04
Is an utterly meaningless and empty simplistic statement. Nobody needs to work, nobody needs to do anything, class is about the level of coercion brought against the disobedient by states and employers.
Danny