I don’t know about this one, from several angles:

A “group of bandits” in Mexico have posted on several anarchist forums (and sent emails to several anarchist groups and individuals) claiming to have stolen Trotsky’s ashes from his mausoleum in Mexico City and baked them into cookies.  They say they then sent said cookies to a number of media outlets, Trotskyist groups, and fellow anarchists along with their accompanying explanation.  Among the things from the statement that’s up on several anarchist sites they say

While we will not repeat everything of our full letter, briefly we propose to give new light to the idea that history does not end with the past and still a small group of bandits can give new direction to fights thought long to be frozen in the time. We want to expand the fight to include dead objects of the past that hold hostage us in the present.

O…….K then.

This shit is what makes anarchism look and sound stupid.  I will give them their point- a very good one- about history not ending and the ability of small groups to forge new directions, even to dusty, “frozen” fights.  As for that line there about “dead objects of the past that hold hostage us in the present”- I’ll suggest these folks consider some good psychotherapy as a much more productive and healthy means of freeing themselves from whatever it is that has them all tied-up in knots.  I’m no fan of Trotsky- not by a long shot- but even the worst of men have families and even the worst of families (not saying his is bad- I don’t know anything about them) deserve the peace that comes through the death of those who came before us and share our blood and heritage.  The desecration of the dead is rarely admirable- no matter the ends.

This act- if it’s true- is sectarian, immature, disrespectful, counter-revolutionary, and pointless, among a whole bunch of other things.  Even by the most flamboyant post-modern or post-left or post-anarchist or post-left-anarchist (or any other fancy intellectual coinage for the post-enlightenment era and beyond) standards, this is senseless and any possible positive that could be argued for this action is grossly out-weighed by the negatives.  And if this claim isn’t true, it’s even more absurd than claiming to have done such a thing.

What, exactly, is the world these folks hope to create by demonstrating that the most basic respect of human life (I’m not even talking about Trotsky here, I’m talking about his family; the guy’s dead, graves and ashes and mausoleums and the like are for one’s family and friends and the future) is not sacred.  I’m all for smashing sacred cows and gutting mindless dogmas and socially-constructed arbitrary dictates, but some aspects of our human experience prove universal over time and geography- and leaving the dead to lie seems one of them.  Certainly not using the remains of the dead for (obscure) (mis-guided) political aims is way off-base, at the least.  Like I said, if these folks were so paralyzed by the specter of Trotsky’s ghost, some good psycho analysis might have been more fruitful for their souls.  Anyway, even an atheist knows a ghost isn’t bound to the remains of one’s earthly body.