First, the Venice Conference was significant in that it opened a new page in the annals of international cooperation, indeed it was a visible display of the new internationalism of the anarchist tradition. It is difficult to appreciate the incredible hard work it took on the part of people with the Centra Studi Libertari (Milano) and C.i.R.A- (Geneva) and the Anarchos Institute. Most particularly we must go on record and express our deepest appreciation to Rossella Di Leo, Amedeo Bertoio, and Marianne Enckeli. i stress this because expressions of appreciation are unfortunately not very common. We take this kind of commitment and hard work too often for granted, a trait that is too widespread.

Second, the Venice Conference also illustrated the difficulties of organising an international conference internationally. In spite of evident good will there are not only different ways to organise conferences, there are also different cultural traditions that come into play. Few participants may have realised that the usual problems associated with conference organising were compounded in Venice by the lack of cooperation by the Venetian socialist and communist municipal authorities. We should not hold another internation conference again in Venice unless a more cooperative municipal council is in place.

Third, the Venice conference was supposed to be primarily a reading or inventory of where contemporary anarchist theory and practice is today. It was not intended to result in a 'practical' outcome except what organisational work took place informally (and there was a tot).

Four, we did not expect 3000 people to come. We hoped for 1000, and that of these a few hundred would participate in the intellectual aspects of the programme while others would participate in the cultural activities. As a result of the human invasion all facilities of the conference were taxed beyond their limits, focus was impossible to maintain, substantial discussions were absent. There were many extraordinary people in Venice, familiar and not. There was a missed opportunity for substantial discussions on a variety of topics of urgency. Notwithstanding the wonderful long evenings in some excellent restaurants with brilliant conversation and debate there was not in my view enough of these exchanges to encourage the maximum cross fertilization of the many creative innovators present.

Can anarchists find a way to bring together, regionally and internationally, those amongst us who want to share our understanding of reality as a means to breakthrough the malaise and confusion that prevails regarding an agenda for the clarification of both theory and practise? The Venice Conference permitted the identification of certain currents of thought, as well as individuals who are doing important intellectual work. What are the next steps in maintaining a network of these and other people. A useful next step will be the international conference in Portugal, but certain other projects should be considered as soon as possible. My inclination is to think of the importance of publications as a means of reflecting current levels of analysis and guides So action. At the moment we have Volonta in Italian, and A Ideia in Portugese. There is nothing of the same quality in French, Spanish or English, The new OUR GENERATION (see details elsewhere in this bulletin) will correct the situation in English. Clearly we have to encourage the creation of serious journals in other languages with the establishment of a network of international collaboration. If we couple this with a schedule of smaller international conferences every two years in different countries, I am under the impression we will be going a good way to finding a mechanism of creative interaction.

Finally a note on sensibility/emphasis/prionty/urgency/relevance. There was a bolt missing in the conference. A bolt attaching us to the social reality of the day. Some thought that an ecological sensibility was not sufficiently present, others thought the nascent philosophy of the new feminism was not pervasive enough, others felt that given the evident collision course of the international arms race an emphasis on anti-war consciousness and action was missing. Contemporary anarchism must become more synthesized, it is partly suffering from indigestion. We are experiencing a moment where a nutritional balance is called for. and the consumption of great bulk (represented by the urgencies of the objective situation). For this to happen more organised inter-action is needed between us, and between anarchists and others.

Dimitri Roussopouios

Reprinted from the Bulletin of the ANARCHOS Institute, Vol. 4 N. 1, January 1985