Both the theory and the practice of anarchism can make sense only if they are revolutionary. But the distinction normally made by anarchists between revolutionary acts and reformist acts is fundamentally equivocal: it is the violent actions that are considered to be revolutionary and the peaceful ones which are considered to be reformist. However this division does not take into account the effects produced by these acts. It is necessary to go beyond this limited vision and consider instead the modifications that a particular act produces in society, whether that act is violent or peaceful.
I therefore believe that it would be better to abandon this distinction with respect to individual acts and that it would be more coherent to evaluate the capacity of a group of actions, violent and non-violent, to cause radical changes in society.
The important thing is to understand which series of actions is capable of overcoming the "resistance" of the present social structure. How it can cause difficulties for the "System” so as to set off a process which will contribute to the development of a libertarian society.
The problem at present is to discover an equilibrium between "revolutionary" and "reformist" practice in order to create, day by day, a radical change. If we cannot attain this general vision anarchism today is condemned to remain a movement for the spreading of ideas without any real influence on society and with, moreover, the characteristics of a small sect.