The history is like Chrustshev: one after the other gets rehabilitated. As dead or as phoenixes - the "petty bourgeois", the "saboteurs of revolution", all the suspected by Stalinist bureaucrats got to know rehabilitation after brutal repression. The officail truth about the Stalinist bureaucracy was simple: it just didn't exist. And how to criticise something not existing officially? So the dissidents first finished living and later finished being dissidents.
The truth about the state terrorism in Italy is that it never existed: so what to do with those opposing it in arms? Quite easy: declaring them history. So one discovers - as some people use to say - that there are no more reasons for applying the subversive rules of the state of emergency; there is no more need to "save the community from the terrorists." This is the state speaking out of some left mouth. To "save the community" the state bombed public places, shoot at demonstrations, tortured in police stations, charged each person not willing to denounce "dangerous individuals" with being accomplices, took hundreds of proceedings changing papers, collectives and fighting committees into "armed bands" and "subversive associations." The leninist bull-shit of the Red Brigades and the other "armed avantgardes" do not change anything of this reality. The "professionals of the revolution" entered the same ground of power they wanted to fight. They tried to erect a spectacolous image to call the exploited together to come to power: the military battle as the continuation of politics by different means. However they didn't threaten the live of the "community", except we name judges, ministers, fascists, creators of high security prisons, and cops community the same way a Public Prosecutor does.
The revolutionary movement of the 70ies cannot be reduced to the rubbish of the avantgarde. The right to exist of power, of money and of commodities was questioned - not this or that minister, this or that government. The workers refused to work sabotaging production; the students didn't want to know more of "culture" discovering itself as exploited next to other exploited; police and left politicians learned the "critique of stones"; in demonstrations shops were looted and the goods were given away; the subversive armed itself against fascists in the hope of people arming itself against the state. These have been the most radical moments of the 70ies. Revolt was in the air and arms were on the street. "Nothing will be like before," this was the impatient' realism.
In this time a left MP stated: "If we don't manage to get control on the unions we have to use the police to do it." And this is exactly what happened. The revolutionary threat was caused by social circumstances and not the privilege of any small group. The spectacle of the power was aimed at suppressing this threat, and presented the subversion as a battle between two armies: the state on one side, and armed parties on the other. Against "terrorists" the state stopped at nothing (journalist slander, police provocation, prison). Associational offences ("armed gang" etc.) are invented for that reason a threat to rebellious individuals still today. Those trying to declare that time "history" to re-produce "democratic legality" clearly state: the party is over, democracy might turn over the page.
But no: the party is not over, it didn't even start. That what is enabling the state to suppress anarchists is the fact that many people mix up the defeat of some armed organisation and the impossibility of a radical change in society.
One can see glow-worms because they fly during the night. A anarchist is of disturbance only when she/he lives in freedom. Imprisoned they get changed into victims, if they are dying, maybe because they were thrown out of a police station's window, they might become martyrs. Only those opposing that world of terror hostile are our comrades, with them only we will start the party again.