Nationwide Organization of Revolutionary Anarchists in the United States?

Over 150 years of the anarchist theoretical and organizing tradition have passed, yet anarchist influence in the United States is practically non-existent. In some local contexts, we do see occasional anarchist influence, but in a nationwide context anarchists are practically irrelevant.

There has been a conversation brewing for a few years among some anarchists. This conversation has moved forward specifically in a grouping of organizations that have come together in recent years around the Class Struggle Anarchist Conferences. Since the first Class Struggle Anarchist Conference in New York City in 2008, it’s been increasingly clear that these different organizations have a great deal of agreement and could be strengthened by unification into a nationwide anarchist organization.

In anticipation for an upcoming conference of these organizations that intends to found this single, nationwide organization, this article is an effort to bring together the many arguments for why such an organization is desirable. More than that, I hope to show the inspirational possibilities of such an organization in the broader anarchist movement, so that this organization can take off after its founding.

Why Anarchist Organization in the First Place?

A great deal of literature already exists on the question of anarchist specific organizations and the role of such a revolutionary organization. For those who aren’t familiar with these traditions, many of the organizations already involved in this process are explicitly informed by dual-organizationalist, especifista, platformist, and syndicalist traditions. These traditions raise the importance of anarchists organizing specifically as anarchists to spread and further develop the influence and understanding of our revolutionary ideas alongside more broad-based social movements.

Given that many anarchists in the United States are increasingly informed by these traditions, I’d like to focus on the value specifically of a unified and nationwide revolutionary anarchist organization.

Mass Propaganda

An organization with hundreds of members throughout the country is capable of spreading anarchist ideas at a larger scale than we’ve seen from the anarchist movement in decades. We could manage and sustain national or regional agitational papers like Freedom/Libertad and Four Star Digest, as well as the more intensive theoretical literature of Ideas & Action and the Northeastern Anarchist. More importantly, with the skills of anarchist media workers around the country, we could surely move into creating high quality audio and video addressing the wide array of radical organizing already happening.

Beyond simply producing media at larger scale and more energy intensive media, we can also create the spaces for debate on ideas, tactics, and strategies within the anarchist movement that help us to unify and coordinate our efforts.

Solidarity at Scale

When anarchist organizers around the country face repression by the state or bosses, or are engaged in particularly difficult or important campaigns, the ability to coordinate national solidarity in a unified way can be instrumental. Bail or legal funds can be immediately paid off from the treasury of a nationwide organization with hundreds of regular dues-paying members. When a fight of national or international significance is happening, members could coordinate solidarity efforts around the country. When hot-spots of struggle pop up, anarchist organizers from around the country could be sent to participate in the on-the-ground organizing.

Build Local Chapters

The hardest organizing one can do is the real task of creating an organization from the ground up, developing the skills of members, finding effective work that the group can do and succeed at, and work to make all of that effort sustainable enough that it doesn’t fall apart in just a few years. Many of the anarchist organizations around the country right now are started by members of other organizations that have moved to a new city and work to start groups like their previous group.

Why not work to develop an ability to help people start local chapters, train some of them in basic organizing skills, give them agitational literature to use in their town, and support them through the challenges that they will inevitably face? Why not strategically consider where we would like to devote resources and energy to creating local chapters, rather than have the anarchist movement grow more or less by accident?

Many current anarchist organizers have also written books or developed inspirational presentations and gone on speaking tours. Let’s maximize the potential of these tours by giving those touring the tools to recruit people that agree into forming locals after the speaker leaves. At the very least, why not have national tools that help us to keep in touch with sympathetic people in cities where we may not be able to build locals, but might have that ability in a couple of years?

Open to Various Levels of Participation

Part of what keeps so much of the anarchist movement small and fairly homogenous is that in effect we require all participants to immediately become high-level thinkers and organizers. For most people, particularly those most affected by the disastrous consequences of the state and capitalism, constant organizing simply isn’t possible. An effective organization is capable of accommodating various levels of involvement, and making it easy for members to move fluidly through those levels of involvement. A unitary nationwide organization would allow members to join without requiring that they become such effective and committed organizers as to have to build chapters immediately, but could help to ensure that whatever level of commitment they can agree to can have a positive impact. This is particularly important to anarchists that may not be surrounded by other revolutionaries in small cities, rural areas, or more than 50 miles from the Bay Area.

Bridging the Rural-Urban Divide

Can a serious revolution happen with organization only in the cities? Can the anarchist movement really have an impact on rural issues when we’re incapable of supporting more isolated rural anarchists? When we talk of organizing the unorganized and building militant worker movements how do our movements continue to miss the various opportunities to work within and find the militants already organizing in immigrant and farm-worker communities?

When there is an option for isolated individual anarchists in rural communities to join up with a nationwide organization, not only can they connect with anarchist organizers in cities nearby, but with other anarchists working in rural communities throughout the entire country.

Impact Politics and Organization on a National Scale

So many of the issues that we work on are national questions. While we aren’t nationalists, we do live in a political reality where many policies are decided on a national level. Opposition to US invasions for instance require nationwide opposition and organization. When those broad-based anti-war organizations are working at a national level, for anarchists to have an impact on their strategies and tactics, we need to coordinate at a national level as well. Rather than have this happen accidentally through networks of friends, why not do this purposefully on an ideological and strategic basis?

The same can be said about most major unions. We often complain the activities of workers within the major unions throughout the country don’t match our political or strategic orientation. Well, why would they? We have zero capacity to coordinate the activities of revolutionaries in the rank and file of these organizations. We can’t strategically choose to orient our efforts at any union larger than the IWW, and even there revolutionary anarchists often can’t assert any coordinated influence. To believe that we will have any real impact on the direction of the labor movement without a nationwide organization of anarchists is to fantasize about the possibility rather than organize towards it.

Ability to Mass-Mobilize Effectively

In the case where anarchists throughout the country are trying to instigate a fight rather than influence the direction of a larger organization, we could actually decide on strategies and tactics together and mass-mobilize on a regional or national scale. Being able to turn out hundreds or even thousands without having to rely on liberal and progressive organizations could allow anarchists to influence the political and economic narrative in a purposeful and strategic way. To have the capacity to push issues forward as anarchists, we wouldn’t have to continue trying to put a radical spin to an otherwise liberal effort.

Honestly, in many ways our ability to mass mobilize without the funding and support of big, liberal non-profits is the key to legitimizing our perspectives and tactics throughout social justice struggles. We can strategically decide on ways to move direct action forward as a key method of social struggle locally, regionally, and nationally.

Internationalism not Nationalism

We don’t believe in nations, so why nationwide organization and not continental? The immediate response is that we do live in a political reality of nations. The politics, economics, and foreign policy largely emanate from a national level. Acknowledging this and organizing on that basis doesn’t mean that we are nationalists, it means that we are organizing based in a shared reality. The Federation of Anarchists-Communists of Argentina, the Anarchist Federation of Uruguay and the anarchist Worker Solidarity Movement of Ireland are not nationalist organizations.

We should be building towards an internationally coordinated anarchist movement. Part of what anarchists in the United States can do is build a strong US organization that can confederate with allied organizations throughout the world.

Our Moment is Now!

The economic context of the United States is drastically changing and this is having an impact politically. We need to take advantage of this moment, because these moments don’t come frequently. To miss this moment may mean setting the anarchist movement in the US back decades. As the nation’s economy slowly implodes, wealth concentration becomes increasingly obvious to millions of people, and the social safety net gets destroyed it becomes clear to millions that the status quo can’t maintain itself and that drastic change is necessary. We are foolish if we think that capitalists, fascists, authoritarian communists, and others won’t be organizing in massive and coordinated ways to take advantage of the moment and manipulate millions of people to fight against their own interests. If we don’t make building anarchist organization on a nationwide scale a priority, than we should understand that we are effectively surrendering the moment to other forces.

Instead let’s take the challenges being thrown at us as an opportunity to build and legitimize to millions our visions of a revolutionary anarchist society. In the coming months, I hope that we will be announcing the creation of a nationwide US-based revolutionary anarchist organization. Let’s get behind this effort quickly and powerfully to show that our ideas are more than just ideas, but an inspired road-map of mass struggle to a genuinely free and equal world.



Nice circle A people in Rochester, but no.

Question for the author: How does this proposal understand itself in relation to the already-existing New World In Our Hearts?

Sorry for the late response, I don't spend much time looking at this site. I think for obvious reasons. Anyhow, I am a part of the New Worlds In Our Hearts network and the process that that group is going through to establish a nationwide organization. I realized that while there had been some conversations about the importance of this internally, there hadn't really been a quick layout of why this was important publicly. So, I wrote this up as a start to that conversation publicly.

obvious reasons being this is a place for news not a place for soliciting people for the anarchist historical re-enactment society

A Socialist friend of mine on facebook posted this and was really excited about it. I think that just about says it all. Keep on truckin', guys, you'll be the ISO in no time. But new and better, because you call it anarchy.

What the fuck did you just fucking say about me, you little troll? I’ll have you know I made top of my collective in the consensus training, and I’ve been involved in numerous skills shares on capitalism, and I have over 300 confirmed food-shares. I am trained in class warfare and I’m the top organizer in the entire US labor movement. You are nothing to me but just another synthesist. I will wipe your lifestylism the fuck out with precision the likes of which has never been seen before on this Earth, mark my fucking words. You think you can get away with saying that individualist shit to me over the Internet? Think again, fucker. As we speak I am contacting my democratic network of re-callable delegates across the USA and Ireland and your sweatshirt patches are being traced right now so you better prepare for the storm, oogle. The storm that wipes out the pathetic little thing you call your anarchy. Your fucking dreads, kid. I can be anywhere, anytime, and I can out-organize you in over seven hundred ways, and that’s just with my definition of revolutionary anarchism. Not only am I extensively trained in running a non-profit, but I have access to the entire arsenal of campaigns for union official positions and I will use them to their full extent to wipe your unbridgeable chasm off the face of the continent, you little shit. If only you could have known what unholy retribution your little “clever” comment was about to bring down upon you, maybe you would have held your fucking tongue. But you couldn’t, you didn’t, and now you’re paying the price, you goddamn summit-hopper. I will shit black flame all over you and you will drown in floods of it. Your fucking dreads, kiddo.


wftwtf? I think it was a well done critism of anarcho-facism! Anytime somebody says "anarchist organization", "anarchist federation", or "anarchist movement" you instantly know they have no idea what they're talking about.

"Anytime somebody says "anarchist organization", "anarchist federation", or "anarchist movement" you instantly know they have no idea what they're talking about." -- You're fucking brilliant! I love this site sometimes.

what if you write it? does that count as saying it too? let's vote on it!!!!

"wipe your unbridgeable chasm off the face of the continent"


IGTT 7/10

10/10, delicious pasta

"You're fucking dreads, kid"
I'm using this from now on!

but, are you trained in gorilla warfare?

lold hard, so hard

i knew it was just a matter of time before an @news version of this meme would be made.

For the Federation!!! Our black-clad troskyists will ensure that the revolution never takes off and always stays orderly and docile.

rather an army than a federation

If the small organizations of anarchists are so powerful as to stop the grand revolutionary fervor of insurrection, then I think the more "radical" among us have bigger problems to deal with, no?

I find this call to be doo doo for another reason really. I would love more continent wide coordination, would be fucking fantastic.

But, the way this organization was created clearly was intended to find ideologically specific lefty anarchist organizations in order to create political hegemony within the organization. They could only find 3 orgs.

The thing is, there could easily be a continent wide organization intended for coordination but this is just the wrong way to do it.

The ISO believes in formal organization and are trotskyists. A nationwide organization of class struggle anarchists would also believe in formal organization, therefore are also trotskyists. The grade school level of reasoning hear from anarchists never fails to amaze me.

Both the ISO and trotskyists believe 'The Revolution' will come from 'worker struggles' and therefore the solution is to 'organize the working class,' using a formal organization that demands a 'unity of tactics.' After 'The Revolution' the workers will control the means of production and society will essentially be the same, except that instead of being run by capitalists the society will be run by 'The Workers.'

That's the similarity. Not simply because both believe in formal organization. Although I think believing in formal organization shows that you don't value individual autonomy, which goes for both platformers/class struggle types and the ISO.

except most class struggle anarchists believe in the destruction of all classes, and not just a "workers' world"

so do Leninists in theory

"Although I think believing in formal organization shows that you don't value individual autonomy". I think making vague, sweeping generalizations like that shows that you don't understand formal organization, individual autonomy, or both.

the ISO is left-trot though, out of tony cliff anti-imperialism somehow ended up throwing luxemburg in there. so...anarcho-stalinists hate them?

Post-left anarchists wish to break with the political left. Third-positionist neo-nazis also with to break with the political left. Therefore Post-left anarchists are nazis.

Ignoring the "grade school level of reasoning" comment, because I'm no language cop and I'm going to assume good anarchist faith that you think young people can reason, too, there are serious comparisons and critiques to be made. If you search the two terms platformism and Trotskyism on somewhere like LibCom, you'll get plenty of hits. I think in the US, we're very used to clumping syndicalism/ any Left anarchism and platformism together, not sure if you're from the US but my impression is that's often not the case in other areas.

Also, several Trotskyist groups/members (Revolutionary Socialist League, Wayne Price, I believe Andrew Flood) have become platformist anarchists, or neo-platformists, or however they prefer to be called. While I'm glad they're no longer Trotskyists and I'm sure many are great anarchists, its fair game to sometimes question how much someone could carry over authoritarian structures and politics. Some would argue that the Platform becomes a sort of stand-in for Trotsky's transitional demands (I might be calling them the wrong thing) that Trots are so proud of pushing and plays a pretty central role in most Trot groups.

In most of the LibCom discussions or articles, you'll find concerns with: being soft on critiques of national liberation, workerism, involvement in union elections, lack of critique of unions, over-concern with structure, lack of a critique of democracy. There is also issues like the use of the term "revolutionary anarchist" to erase the participation of self-identified anarchist groups they see as not-anarchist; I'm not talking about a-caps, who we all agree aren't anarchists, but individualists, primitivists, anti-civ anarchists, surrealists, etc, often while making room for libertarianish Marxists, such as in the book Black Flame.
But I would strongly suggest to search LibCom. This is not the first place platformist groups have been called Trotskyist; you may actively disagree with the reasons people make that argument, but there are arguments being made, it's not just a buzzword or insult; and it is certainly not the last time the accusation would be made, so maybe be less surprised next time.

Here's a mix of pro- and critique articles on the platform, not sure if it's been posted already, thanks.

wayne ain't in any shit anymore


Comrades, all we need is the correct organization and we'll have anarchy!

I don't know if the Black Army IS that group, but it's at least one of the groups that are diving in to this.

Unofficial Points about the Black Army:

1. Who are we? We are pro-liberty insurrectionists, comprised of anarchists and other like-minded freedom fighters.

2. What do we stand for? We seek to excise the federal government, it's agents, and those who operate for those agents from each and every North American community, a process of increasing decentralization to finally autonomy.

3. How do we operate? We are autonomous, free volunteers acting in many affinity groups without formal command structure. Sometimes we consent to general directives, such as the three basic suggestions we strive towards - A) Please don't dress the same way as your enemy. B) Please consider that to receive support from the Geneva Conventions, you should also follow them. C) Please consider your involvement in the Black Army as provisional, and that at no point should anyone from the Black Army claim ownership of land or property - we should only clear space for total democracy and absolute liberty.

4. How do I join? Currently the most comprehensive force is organizing in the Cascadian bioregion. The Black Army has people that have been attending activist-type events for some time now, just start getting involved and you might be contacted by an existing unit, or find ways to contact existing units, or start your own Black Army affinity and keep to the three basic ideas stated above. It is the personal struggle to find the balance between commune and security - as you cannot have all of both. Don't work with who you don't know!

5. What separates the Black Army from SDS, Black Panthers, Occupy Wall Street, Black Bloc, Weathermen Underground, etc.? The Black Bloc is a street protest tactic, and Occupy and SDS were both social movements. The problem with social movements is that they are good for awareness of issues and little else, as freedom will never be handed to you just because you asked for it. We are different from the Black Panthers and Weathermen because we fight with different rules of engagement, engage in low to moderate intensity open or guerrilla warfare, and do not attack non-federal or non-federalized targets. We do not bomb things and go underground. We are an above-ground fighting force and we will not compromise humanity for victory, and will not be responsible for terrorizing civilians more than the federal government has done in the first place. This is not to say the Black Panthers were guilty of this, rather, we are a more open and active above-ground informal organization.

6. Can other organizations, militias, or groups join you? We encourage that if you have a combat-effective unit lined up already, to maintain your identity as a unit and fight as allies in solidarity with us. We will fight vanguards, nationalists, fascists, or supremacists. Militias sometimes take the role of vanguards, but also can be simple patriots. There's nothing wrong with loving your home, but we must agree that nationalism has to go, and will go, whether by the hands of the Black Army or the millions who suffer the cost of nationalism and capitalism. If you'd like to work with the Black Army, find a way to contact us, or make a public statement of solidarity and we might be able to contact you. In addition, by making an armed public presence, we'll find you even quicker!

7. What if I have concerns? It is right you be concerned - there's a lot to be concerned about with warfare. Remember we are at core, an army of anarchists. There is no such thing as being "anarchist enough" in cause. Such is a form of fascism, even if it's an anarchist who makes the claim. We're not out to debate ideology. If you want to learn about anarchists, go talk with some anarchists. If you want to learn about us, talk with us. We're here, just make it clear it's us you want to talk to and hopefully we get in touch. If you are concerned about walking into the middle of a gunfight, know that we are too. Any time we can possibly evacuate people from an area of engagement, we will. If you hear gunfire, it is best to stay low, and stay inside. If you hear bombing, that's probably not us, and you should probably get to the safest, most bomb-proof position you can get to that is indoors or totally isolated. If you are a prepper or survivalist, that's cool, but remember that walking outdoors with guns and camo might get you mistaken by either federal forces or by the Black Army, neither of which have any quarrel with you - and if you decide to bug out, please be safe while you do because the federal government in particular will be taking interest in people who are loaded up or armed. The Black Army are anarchists, not chaos-fetishists. Sometimes we might knock and ask for basic supplies or quarter, but we will never demand it or force our way in. It is your choice to help a fellow human, or deny them. This would only happen in situations where we cannot go to our own spots and we have no other option. Additionally, we have no intentions of looting or pillaging or any of the other faux mentalities about anarchists. We will always ask or offer trade. If you are supplying arms and material support to the federal government, however, we may have a stern conversation to be had.

8. Do you speak for the Black Army? No. I'm one of the first to speak FROM the Black Army. There's an increasing number of us here, speaking, acting, preparing. I speak for myself, and what I say of the Black Army is merely a personal perspective of agreed-upon ideas, which can be freely adapted or interpreted differently by my comrades and by others. I believe the integrity of our perspective is played out in the value of our words and actions - this is a universal idea.

9. What should I wear? We don't like to wear what our enemy wears, so we're avoiding wearing any old woodland/desert patterns from the 80's, we're avoiding the Army Combat Uniform, the Airman Battle Uniform, all-black or all-navy blue Battle Dress Uniform, Marine Pattern Woodland/Desert, Multi-cam, all-olive drab Battle Dress Uniform, and other uniforms which are adopted by US federal forces, agents, and federal-supporting forces. It is best that we look like civillians, not killers, and that is one of the best reasons why camoflague is overrated. If you want to wear some, go ahead, just be an individual about it. Some in the Black Army have put on black patches, flags, armbands, or even drew on flag flags onto their bodies or uniforms - partially for unity and partially because recognized forces by the geneva conventions are required to display their insignia openly, carry arms openly, make crosses obvious if they're medics, and not try to look like their enemy. Look for weapons you can fire well at 100 yards, in calibers of .303, .5.56 NATO, 7.62 or 7.39, or for sidearms either 12 guage or 9mm or whatever you choose so long as you can skillfully reload, fire, safe, and do good weapon transitions. It is recommended you carry ammunition on a load bearing vest capable of storing at least 100 rounds for each weapon you carry, and be able to move quickly and with agility without a cumbersome profile. Do not load bullets with your bare hands, and consider the four basic safety rules of A) Treat every weapon as if it were loaded B) Never point your weapon at anything you do not intend to shoot C) Keep your finger off the trigger when not firing D) Keep your weapon on safe until you are ready to shoot. It is recommended that you invest in a way to cover your face, whether it is a bandanna, scarf, shemagh, balaclava, or other mask. Wear gloves if possible, that are tactically sound, and if you can invest in boots, nothing beats them for ruggedness. Lastly, make sure that your clothes are strong enough that if you need to head out for a few days, fight a few battles, and not be able to change, you wouldn't look like you got attacked and spit on by a werewolf.

Like I said, any other questions, feel free. If you doubt the seriousness, join me for a Molotov cocktail or help me make sure my gun is safe by looking down the barrel as I pull the trigger.

If you have a bunch of criticisms, pull the pin on the grenade and wait a few moments and you will be helped quickly. Look, the Black Army is small, getting bigger, and covers a good chunk now of the PNW. It takes time to get your loadout together, get more people involved safely, and then we're not on some fantastic deadline, unless of course you're willing to pitch in and come with a great plan. We haven't declared war yet, but it could be tomorrow, it could be in a few weeks. It could even be in 2013. But no later ;) How often do you get a chance to join an insurrectionary Black Army? Like, never. So, if you have concerns or critiques, the best thing you could do is join an existing Black Army unit or start your own and start implementing those changes right away.

lol, wut? you aint part of this

Same topic different thing. Black Army isn't an organization - it's all about affinity and autonomy.

Maybe this is why no one but you has heard about it??

The "black army" idea sounds like it's part oogle part gun nut. I can't tell if this person is a wingnut or a confused baby anarchist...

Nice try. I see them as comrades. Now, look, you're approaching a thing you know obviously little about with blind generalizations and guesses to smear the people - so I think I know what I need to about the Black Army, but WHO ARE YOU? Your badge shimmers from here, SIR

sounds like a COINTELPRO scheme to trap some idiot anarchist who doesnt know the jail time theyd get for going some shit like that

"We are an above-ground fighting force

Uhh... good luck with that.

Thank you, that's very constructive.

What, like this place is some bastion of constructive commentary?

constructive criticism here is as easy as herding wildcats.

ok now you guys are getting annoying. I won't fight you but when you all get arrested or killed I won't be fucking sad, cause you're idiots. And believe me, I am not against armed insurrection, or an anarchist army in general, but you have no sense of strategy! You also don't seem to know anything about war. And as to what to wear, there's a reason that the military uses those clothes - because the work. Sure, if you're urban guerillas you definetly shouldn't dress that way. But ACU and certain versions of Multi-Cam (Creye Systems) are superior at defeating night-vision and if you had any sense of military knowledge you would want to wear them if you were in a defense situation (granted, defense is a very bad strategy for insurrection). Also wearing black makes you look like Cops, so you're screwed there too. And good luck with your geneva convention bull shit, that you think the state would even care, although you're probably mostly white and ineternational law tends to grant white people more rights. You pretty much lose all credibility as well when you say the only way that you'll listen to critique is if we join you. A BLA is actually a good idea, but you seem like you're complete idiots so I want nothing to do with it.

I guess it's BA, not BLA... sorry you just sound like one of those idiotic 70s liberation groups. And also fuck you, because after your dismall failure you're just going to bring down repression on those of us who actually take armed resistence and strategy seriously.

"A BLA is actually a good idea"

In what way is this a good idea? In what fucking world do you live in that you believe that the few thousand anarchists here, using any kind of strategy, could somehow succeed in a war against the most well equipped military in the world? Get real.

You're right. I meant only in a very very long term way, and only under specific circumstances.

What office do you work for, Officer?

How does any guerrilla army win? YOU DON'T ACT LIKE A BIG ARMY.
I may have mispoken, or been misinterpreted, let me clarify again: YOU DON'T FUCKING ACT LIKE A BIG ASS FUCKING ARMY!

Does that help?

Ask Cliche Guevara, maybe even Micheal Collins, or what James Connolly thought about guerrilla warfare (after his lesson, if you can ;)

Maybe ask the FSA?

I don't know, you're an asshole, and you should try harder and then you will earn the title of "prick" - which I know all you assholes strive to be.

"What office do you work for, Officer?"

Wait are the cops trying to goad stupid people into dumb urban guerrilla fantasies? Or have they suddenly changed tactics to tearing down the brilliant plans of bullshit internet warriors? Or do you just call out anyone who disagrees with you as a cop? Nice form.

I get really sick of this wannabe guerrilla revolutionary bullshit.

You're cute how you can't tell the difference between prospective and acting. Like a wee little baby. Do you shit yourself too, or just prattle from your high chair?

I'm sorry that you're such a nationalistic, testosterone-driven, capitalistic military chauvinist, assholes. I truly am - I mean, we all know that once the smugness wears off, you're a pathetic excuse of humanity - more like a ghost of a man, veinly wishing you were a "real boy" and attempting here to be one. Keep your wood away.

"All arrested or killed" Where do you work, a fusion center? Or are you so much of a pessimist that all roads lead to demise?

"won't be fucking sad, cause you're idiots" Remind me when anyone hinged their decisions upon what you thought - opinions are like assholes, everyone has them and you're full of shit. Next, idiots? So what are you, the supreme IQ administrator of the world, and you know all these people by name and number? How do you do at your own test? Or are you exempt from being as much an idiot as anyone else?

"not against armed insurrection or an anarchist army in general" Really? You don't seem to feel that way.

Here's a camo deal. ACU is not camo, it is a specific patterned clothing designed to make the wearer passive to the eye, so you don't notice people as much. It's not very effective at all, which is why people use Multi-Cam. Any camoflague that attempts to be universal though, fails miserably, and so does multi-cam. It doesn't truly fit anywhere. Infrared, night vision? That's not camoflague you oogle, that's NIR treatment which can be done to any fabric. Besides, what do you think, that this is some daycamp? Go home, you bastard, why would anyone want you to stick around in the woods as if we always needed the comfort of each others' presence? Why not wear camo then? Well for one, we're not a fucking military. We're civillians who are tired of being cornered by the big bully. If I get shot and die, I don't want to die looking like a soldier, I want to live as if the next morning I could say hi to my love and not look like GI Joe. NO camo is effective in cities. Last I checked, that's the main battleground - being in urban area. Why do I need to become one with the trees? Are you some paramilitary oogle? Do you have OD dredlocks to go with your AR?

Wearing black doesn't make the black bloc look like cops. You really don't know what the fuck you're on about, do you?

Military knowledge - you have again, no idea what the fuck you're on about. The assertion that all anarchists are tactically incompetent is utter bullshit. With the Black Army we've been doing infantry training for many months, and we do that for anyone who joins, ongoing, using geurilla and conventional tactics, strategy, and some heavy dousing of rebellion into the lot. You piece of shit. Tell me, for shits and giggles, the tactical advantage to mounting a defense on the reverse slope?

Geneva conventions - yeah, you're right. The government doesn't give a fuck. Why else would the US help write almost all of them and then NOT sign them? The fact that the US feds are fucking brutes that will be fighting a force that gives a couple flying fucks about humanity speaks volumes of the feds in the first place.

"probably mostly white" - prick, you don't know shit. Nice try though, you're really cute. I'm sure your cop-loving wife loves it when you fuck her missionary style every night - even though you hate that she doesn't give head. I can't blame her, blowing, cop, and gun, don't belong together. You'll shoot and whatever STD's you have won't even matter anymore for her. Or him. Both - are you one of the scandalous types who can't keep their cock in their pants? Because having power is never enough when you know you should be inflicting it upon other people.

Maybe that's what separates you from the black army. You're a fascist-lover, and the black army are fascist-killers. Do me a favor, put on a badge and smile, you spend so much time acting like a cop, you should be proud of it, and proud to die for it. Why beat around the bush?

"How will it end?"
"With my hands around your throat, Mister Creedy."

If you googled defense on reverse slope, I win and you're an idiot, for the sheer fact that I made you give a damn.

Black Army fantasist is my new favourite @news moron. At first I felt bad for the Rochester folks that their sensible constructive article had generated such a hideous trollfest, but who can feel sad with a lolcow like Black Army fantasist around?

""All arrested or killed" Where do you work, a fusion center? Or are you so much of a pessimist that all roads lead to demise?"
Well, technically speaking, all roads do ultimately lead to demise, but that's a slightly pedantic point to make. In the short term, not all roads lead to demise, just those roads that involve a small band of fuckwit fantasists initiating a military conflict with the world's most advanced and ruthless military lead to demise.

"With the Black Army we've been doing infantry training for many months, and we do that for anyone who joins, ongoing, using geurilla and conventional tactics, strategy, and some heavy dousing of rebellion into the lot."
If this was true, you would not be boasting about it on the public internets. No-one can be that dumb.

"Geneva conventions - yeah, you're right. The government doesn't give a fuck. Why else would the US help write almost all of them and then NOT sign them?"
Wait, I can't even tell what point you're trying to make here. Are you using the fact that the US government didn't sign up to the Geneva conventions to support your utterly deluded faith that the US army would abide by the Geneva conventions when putting down an insurrection?

"I'm sure your cop-loving wife loves it when you fuck her missionary style every night - even though you hate that she doesn't give head. I can't blame her, blowing, cop, and gun, don't belong together. You'll shoot and whatever STD's you have won't even matter anymore for her. Or him. Both - are you one of the scandalous types who can't keep their cock in their pants?"
I think this paragraph says more about you than anyone else. Did you write it with one hand?

"How will it end?"
"With you posting a quote from the fictional film V for Vendetta to underline your incredibly shaky grasp of the distinction between fantasy and reality."

This just in: exclusive footage from the Black Army's secret training camp:

I think the authors of this call would do well to examine why and how the past (and failed) federations in the US came and went. FRAC, Love and Rage, and also NEFAC. NEFAC, in a piece not to long ago even went as far as to say, "We're basically a network..."

It's also telling that a lot of these federations came out of networks such as ARA, the anti-globalization period, support for the Zapatistas and political prisoners like Mumia, Earth First!, and also black bloc actions. Looking back at early copies of Northeaster Anarchist, besides the difference in politics, it's really hard to tell the difference between news reals in Green Anarchy or Profane Existance and the early NEFAC press, which was by todays standards, more or less insurrectionary, championing everything from early ELF actions to squatting to attacks on Nazis.

I bring all this up only to mention that while the federation soup has come and gone, the networks and committed comrades are by and large still here, inspiring the next generation of militants and still coordinating themselves.

While personally I could care less if people want to give the federation model another go, my bone of contention is your relation to the broader Left. This is something that NEFAC had a large point of division on, with some of them wanting to be against the unions role in capital as policing agents of the working class and recuperators of workers anger, and those that wanted to work within them.

"We often complain the activities of workers within the major unions throughout the country don’t match our political or strategic orientation. Well, why would they? We have zero capacity to coordinate the activities of revolutionaries in the rank and file of these organizations. We can’t strategically choose to orient our efforts at any union larger than the IWW, and even there revolutionary anarchists often can’t assert any coordinated influence."

This kind of thinking matches those within the especismo camp. While I respect these comrades like those within Sea Sol, I disagree with them that we need to push the 'social movements' 'below and to the Left.' The non-profits and the unions are not 'social movements,' they are part of capital. This isn't just left communist naval gazing; the union heads are working with Obama to implement massive austerity cuts as well as deepen attacks on workers and even unions themselves, as they have been doing since the recession began.

I also find it interesting that you're so quick to write off the IWW. Organized the first Starbucks, the South Street Model (remember that OGs?), as well as the wildcat strikes out in Stockton (209!). Nothing to be ashamed about, my insurrectionary differences aside.

Having more coordination and strategy is great. But if you're idea of change is just influencing the existing Left, which is attacking and killing any sort of direct action and self-organization within the working class, then you're already lost.

Teamster Local 386, lol

this is basically nefac...and a bunch of it's spawn coming home...

oh and the wsa cause we cute.

"This kind of thinking matches those within the especismo camp. While I respect these comrades like those within Sea Sol, I disagree with them that we need to push the 'social movements' 'below and to the Left.' The non-profits and the unions are not 'social movements,' they are part of capital. This isn't just left communist naval gazing; the union heads are working with Obama to implement massive austerity cuts as well as deepen attacks on workers and even unions themselves, as they have been doing since the recession began. "

I'm not in any of the CSAC groups and am somewhat antipathetic towards especifismo, however I get the sense that folks in a lot of these groups are taking a hard look at how well especifismo practice fits in a US context. I mean there's a world of difference between the relatively militant and grassroots social movements in Brazil or Uruguay and unions and non-profits that some (but certainly not all) especifists have been involved with. That's why I think at least a few CSAC orgs have put a lot of their effort into building new independent, militant organizations like a few of solidarity network attempts over the past few years instead of just going after whatever's there. I think Occupy might have opened up some more terrain that especifismo could have potentially been useful at. Although, I could be wrong about all of that.

Do you really think that the difference in the more radical and rank and file oriented social movements in South America just appeared? We are dealing with a hugely different context in the United States, and that should mean a different way of dealing with the left. When many of the especifista groups began working with different movements they were considerably less radical or even left. And, if you look to many of their examples there are portions of the movements that they work with that are certainly more hierarchical, reformist, engaged with the state in different ways, and at times down right co-opted through state funding. Look, I'd be glad to disengage from some of the more traditional unions and non-profits in the US the second that radicals can show an ability to genuinely organize en masse and really pull of some fucking victories and influence in ANY communities. Until that day, I think we're in the position as anarchists of looking for people we can work with. I'm not saying go work with Andy Stern -- but if you really think that you should avoid all 2 million members of SEIU because Andy Stern is Obama's friend, then I think you're strategically short sighted.

I have to say too, that the more people I meet with this sort of a blanketed critique of unions and non-profits, the more I realize that very few of them have any serious experience working with those groups. There certainly are some pretty solid critiques to be had once you're really working with these folks -- but they tend to be more nuanced and specific once people actually have any experience mass organizing with these sort of larger entities.

Seriously, your critique has to go deeper than that. We absolutely NEED to be antagonistic to the majority of the left. Groups like Moveon for instance, liberals, the Democratic Party, mainstream union leaders and whomever else who would recuperate our ideas. Are there shades of grey? Of course, anarchists for instance who advocated staying away from Occupy were totally stupid. But for christ sakes many of those people are the actual enemy. I honestly am sort of in disbelief someone serious about political organizing in this day and age as an anarchist would write this. Maybe I am taking it a different way than I should.

Anyhow, my main criticism of this is that it is so blatantly obvious that you guys just found 3 groups across the country that were ideologically similar and started a "nationwide" network. We NEED continent wide coordination but this is not how you do it.

The IWW still is too focused on the workplace and on improving the position of workers within capitalism rather than building a real rival to it. If we free its potential from that box, then we'll really have something.

"The IWW still is too focused on the workplace"

Why shouldn't it be? The workplace is where most people spend way too much of their time and where a lot of people have their most immediate and alienating conflicts with capital. If folks want to do shit outside of the workplace why can't they start or join other groups for that? It's what lots of wobblies do. The IWW isn't and shouldn't be the only revolutionary group out there.

Have you ever taken more than 5 minutes to really think the a realistic process of building a real rival to capitalism? If you have, you'd probably realize like most others that we absolutely need organizations focused on the workplace and building worker power within the workplace as a part of that process. If that's not your cup of tea, go do something else. But do you honestly fucking believe that any real challenge to capitalism will happen with mass workplace organizing?

"While I respect these comrades like those within Sea Sol, I disagree with them that we need to push the 'social movements' 'below and to the Left.'"

Uh... I don't know who in SeaSol you know, but I've been with them for five years, and literally no one I can think of believes that. So, for the record, SeaSol as a group and as individuals don't want to "push the 'social movements' 'below and to the Left.'"

It would be STUPID and REACTIONARY to think that we can achieve INTERNATIONAL COORDINATION and DISCIPLINE without MAXIMUM O-R-G-AN--I-Z-A-T-I-O-N!!
We worship mass production and mass society, hence the obvious NECESSITY
for the worship of ORGANIZATION. It is that and that alone that makes us strong!
We cannot allow anarchy and autonomy to prevail!!

You're funny, I like that.

Here's the thing. We've got two things here - the Black Army and the National Organization of Revolutionary Anarchists. What are we doing with these two things? Calling one oogle wingnuts, and calling the other counterrevolutionary..... how the fuck does that move us any farther than we were an hour ago? Oh yeah, 'cuz they don't. Do I believe in organizations and federations? No, because they sell organization and facism like hotcakes when given the chance. Do I believe in armies? Well, I don't know enough about the black army thing. What is to be done? Well, take your pick, you can set back what could be two good things, you could ignore them (because of course, the world does nothing if you pull the sheets over your eyes), or you could work with or join them and hammer out your concerns like actual human beings. What is the extent of agent infiltration on anarchistnews? Is it so much that two good ideas are immediately smeared, or is this actually just how slimey people can be when given a keyboard and anonymous posting? Who, pray tell, gives a shit? I really want to know.

It's the same as with all the people who ragged on Occupy. Maybe some of it is infiltration, but I don't think that's even the majority of what we see. And I don't think they're actually waiting for the perfect anarchist movement that will never come either.

Really, the deal is that they're just scared of any public movement. Real interaction, real sharing of ideas, with real people, really doing it face to face, really working together even when we might not all agree...these concepts terrify some "anarchists" who have built perfect systems in their heads and can't stand to see their daydreams melt away in the real world.

I don't want to be overly harsh because I think a lot of these people have good minds, they just need to get out of them a little and understand that anarchy is not what they're imagining, it's not a single plan, it's the beautiful mess humans create when we each have our own plan and work together anyway.

Thank you, I feel less insane about having come to similar conclusions.

This is not a good statement. Recently all the Occupy critiques surfaced in a chicago anarchist meeting. It was a different thing everyplace, a clusterfuck of ISO, RCP, authoritarians and pacifists, with representatives. Occupy chicago wasted valuable time and energy resources.

Those people you call a clusterfuck and then box into handy, pre-made categories were real people each with their own ideas about what would be nice. How do you think anarchy will ever work outside of your anarchist meeting spaces if you don't engage with these people? Do you think they're all just gonna spontaneously change their minds and agree with you in the world to come?

Yeah, it was a different thing everyplace, that's because humans are different people everyplace. So I would argue that the clusterfuck itself was a good use of time and energy--up to a point at least--because it allowed humans to rub up against other humans. The problem came when too many people couldn't handle that anymore and left, leaving a thing that no longer really reflected the diversity of our aspirations.

For those who don't participate in this kind of thing, I guess the question is how do you use your "valuable time and energy resources" instead? Because until we know the ending we can't really decide whose resources have been wasted and whose haven't, can we?

Hmm, ", it's the beautiful mess humans create when we each have our own plan and work together anyway.".....So THIS is your definition of anarchy, not anarchism. Chaos in other words, selfish individuals, narcissists in fact, trying to fit incompatible egos together into a united mishmash of self-absorbed public performances.......Right

Anarchy, but not chaos. Why do you assume that people working together though they have different plans and ideals must be selfish, narcissistic, self-absorbed performers? Nothing about having different goals necessarily implies any of that and if anything "working together" implies the very opposite.

Don't you yourself have a variety of goals? Often contradictory ones? Yet you integrate them without equalizing them and call yourself a single individual. Does this make you a mish-mash of self-absorbed public performances? Maybe it does, I don't know you, but it doesn't have to.

pish posh, since when do people respond to trolls with a thoughtful and heartfelt appeal to their diseased and corrupted soul? Next time just tell them to fuck off cuz you shit where you want and then go on to make them feel petty and insecure. That way we're all miserable together.

Yes comrade, I agree with you. Anarchism can only be achieved once the whole of the fucking world thinks and behaves exactly like you. Those that don't will be "re-educated" with an emphasizes on building a strong work ethic.
As for the rest, they will be lined up and shot.......only for the revolution of course.

I'm pleased you share the same ideas. I shall line you up first for using sarcasm and for assuming I am a sociopath.

Join a shit organization in order to change it, really? Organizations adopt a history and infamy of their own, and traditions that control them. Should one join the military, congress, Enron, the ISO or RCP in order to re-direct them to anarchy? How about the NSDAP?

The Black Army is not a thing, though. It's one obsessive @news commenter.

You're cute, will you fuck me with your tiny white penis?

Oh, sorry, I just counter-raped your dialog. Put it away and go home.

You're like the saddest troll on @news, don't ever stop.


ummm ?...I'm not white/do not have a white penis or a penis in general.


Angry Inch? It's of no consequence, we've all been wrong before and that's okay.

Even is one was into the idea of creating a new national organization this article does not say anything about what the next steps would be to help make it happen. It leaves any would-be enthusiasts just hanging there...

That's often the problem. When it comes to mass action or insurrectionary forces, it's all uncharted territory. There's no manual that says "here's how to recruit people, not look like an idiot, and not be had by the feds". So it's all sort of experimental and there's a lot of fear and intimidation around the matter. One reason why more people troll these things more than they say "sure, I'm in".

For the anarchist organization thing, yeah they kinda left on a cliffhanger, but it's a part of a upsurge right now in insurrectionist groups and stuff.

I think as far as people wanting to go into insurrection stuff goes, the black army is probably the one making the biggest splash, and the pond's getting bigger.

Normally I would agree with you on something like this, but there's been a process over the past few years of several US orgs (including Rochester Red and Black) coming together into one national org (or borg for the egoists). I think the whole New World in our Hearts network was an interim step towards that. There's a conference happening sometime next year to formalize it into one organization. I would guess that this is more of a discussion document aimed at people in groups already engaged in that process than a directionless appeal into space.

I dunno about directionless but if that's true than the black army is a wildcard

JOIN the ILF ( Intercommunal Liberation Front aka Interzone Liberation Front ) We organize like the well known ALF and ELF and we practise full-spectrum-resistance all the way up to full spectrum revolution.
Advancing in diversity we strike in unison. All power to the ILF - all power to the anarchists!

You keep saying that but you don't say how.

You anarchists have it all wrong. Deep Green Resistance is the only real movement with a program for revolutionary change. You don't need a national anarchist organization, you need to join DGR.

I don't know whether to laugh or troll you

^this. the above commenter is in fact speaking the truth. get with it comrades.
Follow these steps:
1. Join DGR
2. Salmon.
3. Revolution.
4. Talking gorillas.
5. Nation-wide federation.
6. Witchcraft.
7. Orgies.

Bam. Class war won. end civ, full stop.

If you combined Jane Goodall, Margaret Thatcher, a yeast infection, and a safari.........

you forgot the sweaters

You have to stop being an Anarchist to join DGR.

...that all went waaay over your head.

I see where whoever wrote this is coming from, but thinking in "national" terms is completely unacceptable. We should regard nations and national divisions as parasites.

As for "mass"- Read "Anti-Mass"
There is a difference between "mass" and "a lot". We can have a huge number of people (potentially everyone) organized together without it being "mass". IMO "mass organizing" is an oxymoron, because really only the people who are coordinating are organized; the rest, the people in the crowd, are not. So the question is one of how we organize. If a federation/delegation structure is good enough for "after the rev" why not to bring it about? In fact, why not make such an organizational structure the seed of the new world, to grow until it supplants the old one entirely?

That's why it's so important to not make accommodations and compromises, such as for nations. What we build now might be the structure of the next major step. Making concessions for the sake of convenience is nothing but laziness. Anyway, fuck, look at Quebec earlier this year and Mexico City last week. Why wouldn't we want to be organizing with these people?

That said I agree with the idea behind the phrase "mass propaganda" if not the terminology. Not only can common communications platforms be a way of sharing information, they can show people who may be interested that, yes, we are actually serious about this.

So your critique is basically semantics? Really? This whole thing is unacceptable because of a couple of words used. I can think of no bigger impediment to anarchists in the US getting anywhere than this frame of mind.

Ugh! The time of platformism is nigh! Ballots are predicted!

There are too many sub factions with in the anarchist clique of u.s. to make a difference.

Remember when the black panthers became a national organization?the feds fucking killed them all!

Yeah, you're right. The state is murderous. We should just do nothing. Go home everyone, nothing to see here.

Oh look, lifestylism doing what it does, a full stack of idiots hiding behind being anonymous so they dont have to own their words. All childish bullshit and no theory. Bravo... this is why we have fuck all in the states, good job morons, good job.

Please. What year is this?

I propose we establish a National Federation of Lifestyle Anarchists

Platform, Syndicalism

Down for this when it sheds leftism. Organizing, not organization. There's no such thing as growth. To be using 150 year old ideas is to already be set back decades.

I propose a union of individualist affinities.

And, because you don't have an organization of anyone behind you to back such a proposal, this comment on anarchistnews is as far as it will go. Proof enough of the uselessness of that idea to me...

"Given that many anarchists in the United States are increasingly informed by these traditions [dual-organizationalist, especifista, platformist, and syndicalist], I’d like to focus on the value specifically of a unified and nationwide revolutionary anarchist organization."

I don't think that is a given, so I stopped reading right there.

Good comment bro.

When one hears the word anarchist preceded by the word "revolutionary" one can expect this is platfomist stuff. A national platformist organization will give a national bad reputation for anarchism as more or less the same as trostkists. ¿Is it everywhere like this and as such the for of national organization or networking only possible within platformist forms? Clearly not. In Mexico they recently established a Mexican Anarchist Federation which seems is closer to the synthesis model ( ( In countries like France, Spain, Italy, Germany, Bulgaria and Belarus the biggest organizations are the synthesis ones and not the platformist. In fact in the biggest current anarchist movement in the world, the spanish one, platformism is absent and platformist organizations don´t exist.

Now i would not personally regard national synthesist organizations as the best options but certainly the Spanish FAI in the 1920s and 1930s was modeled in synthesis anarchist principles which there meant incluiding individualist anarchists just as it happened in France and Italy in the post-war period. I tend to adhere to synthesis principles but perhaps a network national model might be better for me. If i lived in places like France, Italy and Spain i will very likely participate in International of Anarchist Federations ( federations even though i am aware there have been splits from it due to generational gaps and other issues.

according to the article, "For those who aren’t familiar with these traditions, many of the organizations already involved in this process are explicitly informed by dual-organizationalist, especifista, platformist, and syndicalist traditions."

It's not platformist, and as a member of two of the organizations involved in this process, I'd even say the organizations involved in this that do say they're informed by platformism just have outdated documents and don't actually have many platformist members. Broadly many of these orgs are anarchist-communist (like in IAF which you posted...), but some aren't even that. I think it's sort of silly how everyone's assuming this is at all like ISO: our goal isn't the growth of our own org, to lead the revolution, to sell newspapers, to co-opt movements, or to make anarchism more like socialism. It's not mutually exclusive from other forms of struggle nor is it the primary avenue of struggle or vangaurd, but those involved recognize the benefits of having a stable, visible, and resourceful organization, for, as the article lays out pretty clearly, "mass propaganda, solidarity at scale, building local chapters, opening anarchism to various levels of participation, bridging the rural-urban divide, mass-mobilizing effectively, and impacting politics and organization at a national scale".

still i will not join. i am an individualist anarchist and lifestyle anarchist. i will only join an explicit anarchism without adjectives network or federation. I think platformists and trotkists should join forces in one single libertarian leninist party.

of course i also have to manifest my rejection of both anarcho-primitivism and the more violentist wing of insurrectionism as well as of platformism. i think those who don´t identify with either of those things should strive to join forces around anarchism without adjectives principles.

You do of course realize that by narrowing yourself to a more and more specific program of who counts in your "without adjectives" world that you are actually acknowledging the reason why platformism exists, right? And, if you're genuinely anarchist without adjectives, it would mean allowing the primitivists, insurrectos, and platformists in right -- because without adjectives has typically meant to pretend the adjectives don't exist and unify on, ya know, just being like self-identified anarchists.

Thankfully for many of us involved, we also wouldn't accept you! What the fuck good does an individualist, lifestylist do in an organization anyhow? Make the meetings smell bad? Refuse to adhere to an agreed upon agenda?

Go to France, spend some time with Alternative Libertaire -- and rapidly realize that their version of synthesism looks a LOT more like Americans version of platformism than you'd expect. Go to Mexico, find the same thing. Go to Spain, find the same thing. Then go to South America (a continent that apparently doesn't exist in your analysis) and find that nearly ALL of the major anarchist organizations are especifista and have a pretty high regard for platformism.

i would join a federation of anarchists affinities if there was one. I think we need that. The system is using our divisions to keep us farther apart and there for keep everyone oppressed.

Wow, I vaguely remembered there was a reason I stayed away from this place, and the comments proved me right. Fucking ridiculous.

and nothing of value was lost, etc

The revolution begins every day at home. I consider the enjoyment of the washing of dishes voluntarily as a truly revolutionary act because it shatters patriarchal layers of hierarchy and the relegating of menial tasks to assumed inferiors by embracing all types of labor as equally significant and important. Cleaning a community toilet is as important as brain surgery and should be payed at the same rate. Value of labor starts at home.

you are invited tomy house to wash the smash patriarchy any time. hahahahaha

Collectivize (-ate?). This is antithesis to Anarchism. I agree with creating broad communtiy based solutions to all of the issues brought up here, but this isn't the way. Collectivize and communicate with one another. Any place where there are 10 or more Anarchists, even if you don't have anything to organize around, just to shop ideas and communicate with each other. But all these issues adressed here are relevant.

Ideas will totally make revolution! We don't have to do ANYTHING! Just like, share ideas man. Good one. Tell me again how that isn't just liberal hippy bullshit??

Who else here believes organization is the antithesis to anarchism?

2012 just about going on 2013 and people still don't get it right. I blame anarchists for not educating the public. They should be working to disprove them myth that "anarchy is synonymous with chaos".

We need some stability. North America Anarchists as a whole is nothing but a huge clusterfuck of madness. Things would change around here if so many human beings weren't so stubborn and ignorant.

Yeah man! Fuck the FAI and their revolution! We can do it better with nothing!

Only if it's hierarchical. So maybe organization with a structure that rotates or swaps duties thus preventing the formation of entrenched power groups and their corrupted agendas.

The first rule you must understand is that Anarchists will never receive any acknowledgement or good press - EVER. Never Ever Ever. An anarcho-chubby could be elected el presidente de los estados unidos and the best that would appear in the WashPo would be that a far left independent won. This carrying on about how out of the loop and ineffective la anarquista is, is simply low self-esteem and lack of dander masquerading as an article. Fact-o-matter is that if anything gets done, at all, the anark will be doing it. Did you miss the wild hysteria and gnashing of teeth from Boots, Swanson and the Hedges? Was not elements of anarq on full display in the best parts of the otherwise lame "Occupy"? The ripples that went out around the world? Which resulted in the ultra-hysteria from Mr. O to shut it all down, but pronto?

Here is the clue - uncle Charlie knows what's up, knows the score, knows the history, knows the full-on bullsh*t of his own propaganda. When he sees a black bandana, he instinctively knows that these moth-fuc-rs are going to mess up his dividends, portfolio and cash flow in the worst of ways, and there fore will be ignored in the media cesspool and if effective, COINTELPro-ed like Bobby Hutton.

Stop trying to be all Linsay Lohan or Kim Kardashian. You are not these kinds of girls, so stop mugging for the camera and just put your head down and get the job done.


for naming stupid pop culture personalities around here i give you the title of "The Cancer of Anarchy"

What? "Anarchist Organizing" isn't good enough?

"Non-hierarchical Anarchist Organizing" would be redundant as fuck wouldn't you think?

I think you are unaware of how hierarchical organization imposes subliminal authoritarian values upon those within its structure! There are power displacements and dominations which are so nuanced that they become regarded as petty personality clashes, nevertheless, they set the standard which magnifies itself further up the organizational ladder until we have a subtle dictator at the top telling us to kill a stranger. Non-hierarchial is easily attained by having random chairpersons introducing any relevant agenda pertinent to their regional or collective desires, it's all informal, just go with the flow, simple!

Yeah, because informal organization never leads to horribly fucked up hierarchies!

Random chairpersons is the surest, and probably stupidest way, to lead to a wildly ineffective group with such informal, unstructured tyranny that no one knows how to deal with. Do you really think having horribly coordinated meeting is democratic to working people that show up to your shit? Do you really think that EVERYONE should be good at EVERY task? Some people are shitty, undemocratic, overbearing facilitators -- they should never be offered the job. Some people think so chaotically that no organized meeting could ever be organized by them -- do we really need to force them to think a certain way? Or can we just admit that maybe not everyone should be prepared to do every task.

While filming the Parent Trap in 1998 I attended most of the workshops at Active Resistance Toronto. I Know Who Killed Me was a clear exposition on the forms of self-abolition that proletarian women interpolate through a surrealist Lacanian lens, even Variety called that. I think I look great on camera; who are you, my Dad?

"When anarchist organizers around the country face repression by the state or bosses, or are engaged in particularly difficult or important campaigns, the ability to coordinate national solidarity in a unified way can be instrumental. Bail or legal funds can be immediately paid off from the treasury of a nationwide organization with hundreds of regular dues-paying members"

This is a great and risky idea. I hope the writers don't except every 'member' to pay for shit... come on now. I understand having a WePay and doing some donations, but oh damn we talkin about having a treasury and shit? Alright now we gonna need some further explanation of all of this..

If you need the basic of having an organization have a treasury explained to you, then you're already a fuckin lost case. Good luck accomplishing nothing ever.

Organizing doesn't stop costing money regardless of political ideology unless the organization is able to cheat the money system by stealing that is. ;-) But in practical terms. Most anarchists won't commit to that. Of course steal shouldn't be excluded. lol It's anti-capitalist and unlawful at the same time. Love it.

Do it

This is how the left thinks in Rochester new york... Fuck them all

Very Schizy! Aversion to organization, coupled with pretense to organization. You need a shrink bad!

Add new comment

Filtered HTML

  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <blockquote> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
To prevent automated spam submissions leave this field empty.
Subscribe to Comments for "Nationwide Organization of Revolutionary Anarchists in the United States?"