Who are the Anarchists?

  • Posted on: 4 February 2017
  • By: thecollective

From submedia.tv

Who are the Anarchists? from subMedia.tv on Vimeo.

Who Are the Anarchists?

Why Resistance Is Coming from Below

America is in the throes of crisis. Polling as the least popular starting President in history, Donald Trump has taken the reins and intends to force his agenda on the world by brute force. Alongside him, outright white supremacists are coming out of the woodwork, convinced that their time has arrived. Millions who once counted on the Democratic Party are losing faith in the entire political system. Can anything be done to halt the rise of tyranny?

This is the context in which anarchists are once again returning to the stage of history and the front page of the New York Times. Neither voting nor passive protest has worked, and the popular imagination is shifting towards open confrontation. Even Trump himself is tweeting allegations about “Professional anarchists, thugs and paid protesters.” Fancy that—a billionaire who hired actors for his campaign launch, accusing working-class protesters of being mercenary.

The grassroots resistance that has rocked the US since Trump’s election isn’t the work of paid or professional protesters—nor, by extension, of George Soros, the supposed “puppet master” of the anti-Semitic conspiracy theories Trump is referencing. It hasn’t come from the Democratic Party, the non-profit sector, or the various socialist splinter groups.

Resistance to Trump has come from ordinary people taking action on their own terms without waiting for leadership or instructions. It has come from the same people who breathed tear gas in Ferguson while facing down a militarized police force to defend their neighborhood. It has come from the tens of thousands who survived freezing water cannons and rubber bullets at Standing Rock to block a pipeline that Trump is now trying to railroad through. It has come from those who risked their lives to confront the KKK in Stone Mountain and Neo-Nazis in Sacramento. It has come from the people who disrupted Trump’s inauguration on January 20, who shut down airports January 28 and 29 to defy Trump’s Muslim ban, who shut down Milo Yiannopoulos on February 1.

All of these efforts were organized horizontally according to broadly anti-capitalist and anti-authoritarian frameworks. It’s not just a few people in masks: the spirit of the times is anarchistic.

This resistance was growing long before Trump. The surge of momentum that has exploded into the national consciousness over the past two months has its roots in many years of simmering discontent. The object of this discontent is not just the Trump regime, but a social order that generates dramatic imbalances in power and access to resources while precipitating war, climate change, and ecological collapse. With the most authoritarian defenders of this order at the helm, only a thoroughgoing approach to social change stands any chance of having an impact.

Anarchists are among the only ones offering a clear vision of another way of living. In organizing networks and community spaces around the world, we come together to assist each other in meeting basic needs and building the collective capacity for self-defense. In neighborhoods, workplaces, and schools, anarchists are fighting gentrification, police brutality, and exploitation while creating inclusive alternative infrastructures for survival. Across bioregions, we are organizing to protect our drinking water and the earth we all depend on for life.

This vision conflicts directly with Trump’s top-down, exclusive, authoritarian agenda. It is the only real alternative: Obama’s time in office showed that attempts to improve the state only leave it stronger and more legitimate, so that the next tyrant to take the helm has more force at his disposal. Many people are afraid that the regime will crack down on resistance, but Trump is determined to crack down on all of us regardless. The more that we come together, the harder we push back against the authorities, the faster and more courageously we act, the safer we ultimately will be.

You and your friends already constitute an affinity group, the essential building block of grassroots anarchist practice. Identify the objective you want to accomplish, build your skills, make contact with other groups, and go into action. That could mean disrupting the recruiting efforts of white supremacists or blocking the infrastructure Trump depends on to implement his executive orders. It could mean joining people in defending their homes from eviction or protecting their land from development. It could mean establishing rapid response networks to react to attacks or establishing a free clinic to provide the health care people cannot obtain through the institutions. We are counting on you to help get us out of this situation, to create the world of togetherness and freedom that everyone deserves.

Further Info

A is for Anarchy

The Secret Is to Begin: Introductory Materials for Anarchists

TrumpTheRegime: Resources and Ongoing Resistance to Trump and the Far-Right

category: 

Comments

Laughable. All fall in line behind crimethinc, IGD & submedia, the holy trinity of the one true anarchism!

Huh.... I guess the world has shrinked down to US/Canada at this point.

Waiting for confirmation about life in some other continents... got any leads? Pretty sure I heard that there are others, since (hold onto your seat) the Earth is... spherical!

Northern Europe and Scandinavia (get out a map Americans) is a leftist cesspool, Antifa vs nazis, shitty feminism, lots of ressentiment, don't come. Over and out!

I actually tried to migrate to Europe recently. Climbed into a packed budget airliner. Coach. Was hell. Bunch of other guys in there that looked just like me. We all figured, hell, we could still pass for teenagers, twenty-somethings. Start our lives over again. Find a nice blue eyed, blonde haired person who identifies as a woman, without too many tattoos. Why not? We could still dream.

Seemed like months went by. It was cold up there at 35,000 feet. They can't afford to heat the cabin on those long transatlantics. Most of us weren't prepared for the journey, still wearing screen printed t-shirts & parts of our heads shaved. One guy forgot his beer growler. Started freaking out. They only had Amstel Light.

The plane finally landed. I claimed my bay area refugee status. Showed 'em my call out scars.

"Victim of the gender wars," I said. "Party leaders found me with... contraband literature. There was a show trial. Pinned a consent violation on me. I was sentenced to an accountability process. I knew what that meant, so I bailed. Fugitive now."

The border agent reviewing my case wasn't interested in what I had to say. She couldn't even look me in the eye. Although she was wearing a burka so it was hard to tell.

"Sir, it says here that you aren't from a country associated with radical islamic terrorism," she said in Arabic. "I'm afraid we can't let you in. You're too much of a safety risk."

They sent me back. What else should I have expected? These people don't understand war. They don't get what its like to not have multiple wives. Stuck in their worry free little bubble of yogurts & lamb, praying fifty times a day. Must be nice.

Some parts of the states had survived the campaigns. I made inroads there. Found a nice little armchair on craigslist to settle down with. Guess I'll be keeping it warm a little longer, yet.

Over and out.

Gosh I love that clown... like a ray of light shining through the smoking carcass of the Fallen God Emile (or crashed AI-driven spaceship back from Jupiter). Zack Parsons is that uuu?

That's just the inevitable evolutionary path Neo-Marxism has taken in that region, NA anarchism isn't much different, the thing is that the Northern Europeans have embraced about 75% of NA anarchist theory into their national constitutions. Its leftist for sure, what do you expect, and anyway, how does one form an individualist nihilist autonomous zone the size of Canada without compromising slightly to the Marxist orthodoxy?

What a dumb comment. That is not what he said or implied at all.

"Northern Europe and Scandinavia (get out a map Americans) is a leftist cesspool, Antifa vs nazis, shitty feminism, lots of ressentiment, don't come. Over and out!"
All the trappings of a Neo-Marxist state, and exactly the same praxis of a majority of NA anarchists, except as I said before and will repeat, they have been doing the neo-Marxist agenda since the end of WWII without interruption from Amuhrican capitalism and their wars, Korea, Vietnam, Middle East. The Northern Europeans have taken Neo-Marxism to the level of libertarian socialism in their state constitutions, the same politics and values which pass as anarchism to over half the anarchists in NA. Further south in Rojava they call Bookchinism anarchism, I'm sorry if this upsets your self-image of being a leading edge anarchist, but your perceptions of anarchism are passé, people are now looking back at Robert A Wilson and other individualists for inspiration.

And for more information contact your local authority prevention office.

"Internationalism" and "global revolution" are here stated *entirely* uncritically by Lopez, with no mention of the fact that many anarchists consider these concepts to be part of a retrograde, religious Marxist analysis.

And there is no mention whatsoever of civilization here - I guess Lopez and company have had a change of heart since the days of END:CIV and now think that might be too much for The People to handle. Wait until they start coming to our meetings and actions, slowly bring them into enlightenment, and maybe sometime around 2050, at the meeting of the Fourth International, we can try to put "Civilization" on the meeting agenda.

...is actually a very light tone of Red. Not implying Pink here, but rather socio-democratic. Like him collaborating with the completely reformist and socio-democrat WSF, which in 2016 is quite an odd thing to do for an anarchist... or even for a social anarchist, unlike during the heydays of antiglobalization.

So it seems, Leftists have trouble evolving over time... a part of their brain appears to be stuck with contextual political referents from 10, 15, 20 years back. Or maybe that's just some desperate nostalgia. Or maybe it's that old distasteful leftist organization/cult/secret society from 2001... if they exist as any coherent group or clan.

But hasn't the TPP -that's been completely unopposed by those survivors of the summit-hopping era- just been abolished by a US administration they're decrying so much as a fascist regime?

Leftist can no longer consider secritive collision of world powers, because this is now the terrain of Alex Jones, one of the many current manifestations of literally-Hitler.

Similarly, a leftist can no longer consider that something more than Al-Qaeda was behind 9/11, although this had its origins in unpatriotic state-distrust, and was not at odds with leftist ideology because George Bush was in office.

Conspiracy theories in general are now off the table for them. Their comrades & allies in the state must be treated with the benefit of a doubt and no criticality. Such questioning of solidarity would weaken their percieved hold on the political terrain. They must secure the pejorative power of the term conspiracy theory for themselves to both explain their political losses in '16, and to prepare a defense for the coming prosecution of high-level liberals in the state.

As such, their enemy has become purely rhetorical: all the various ists, isms, & phobias which define white supremacy, fascism, & literally Hitler. It's their binding force; their common enemy. It's existence beyond lingual flourish is debatable.

You sound like a right-wing troll. My Leftist active denial systems are still impervious to such cynicism.

What's this... my Holy Bible? NO, that's Rationalwiki, telling us that autism simply cannot be caused by FDR-approved drugs, because those saying that are conspiracy theorists! So let your children take any shots from the (completely non-capitialist and uncorrupt) big pharma industry that's, like, completely ruled by the Hippocratic Oath. Or we'll just assume you've been listening to Alex Jones too much.

No need for tin foil hats... I got a thick skull that repels any "Rightist" contamination, especially from those concerned parents!

Heard this theory about how online flame-wars and social media style interactions have led to this tendency to constantly strawman everyone so hard that you're not actually talking to each other at all. There's just this vague, hostile conceptualization of a political position, sort of like a literary trope and you just cram every other post you read in to it. These labels get tossed around: SJW, leftist, alt-right, whatever but the rate of reading comprehension and good-faith discussion is in reality, very low.

This is separate and distinct from trolling or astro-turfing because those are deliberate activities with agendas, whereas the people I'm referring to honestly believe they're correctly categorizing everyone as their ideological enemy but it's just lazy and myopic.

The only useful conclusion to be drawn from this is how pointless a lot of these interactions are, where there's no hope of any kind of new insight or resolution of the tension between opposing views. Both people are actually just yelling at their own reflection in the mirror, serving as proxies for each other's forgone conclusions.

Leftists have never been big fans of conspiracy theories. There's been a few eras, like the Bush years, that saw a lot of overlap between various populist movements, but fundamentally conspiracy theories just aren't a leftist thing and never have been. This isn't new - the same tensions were present in early-1900s Russia where Marxists and anarchists fought it out with those who believed in the Protocols, the 1960s when the hippies faced off against the Birchers. Leftism is and always has been about systemic analysis, not fairy tales. Conspiracy theory, at it's core, has always been more associated with the right. Alex Jones isn't an anomaly, this is a tradition that goes right back to the Illuminati scares of the early American frontiers.

Conspiracy theories are fundamentally at odds with systemic analysis. Whereas the former puts the blame on shadowy groups of individuals corrupting social institutions, the latter puts the blame on the institutions themselves. Conspiracy theorists may believe that banks, capitalism and the state have been subverted by an evil cabal of oligarchs, and that may be true, but it misses the point that these institutions would be shit regardless of who's in charge. Worse, it gives the impression that these institutions could work if the right people were in charge, or that they'd work perpetually if only we could get rid of the reptile-mason-jews.

Can a leftist consider "something more than Al-Qaeda" behind 9/11? Plenty of leftists I know do, though the number has been dropping pretty steadily for a decade or more at this point. Not only did 9/11 truth turn out to be a colossal dead-end in terms of organizing, but most of that shit's been debunked at this point. Try and point that out, tho, or even ask critical questions, and you'll be accused of having some kind of devious ulterior motive (like the third paragraph above). That gets tiring, so people don't bother.

As someone who was much younger and dumber when the towers fell, I'll admit that I had a lot of sympathy for this stuff for a while. I bought the claim that "conspiracy theory" was just a dirty word for ideas that the establishment didn't like. Then I met a bunch of conspiracy theorists, and found out the hard way why nobody wants anything to do with them. These guys aren't just irrational and reactionary, they're thoroughly fucking toxic individuals. They'll scuttle your meetings, ruin your public credibility, then turn on you and launch into bizarre very personal but very public attacks on everyone involved. One of the only smart things the left has done in recent years is to marginalize this shit.

I appreciate the tangent your taking, but I was mainly commenting on the use of the term conspiracy theory as a marginalizing, discrediting term.

"Systematic analysis" is not inherently attached to establishing truth, nor indicative of good process. Vague premise. Both 9/11 truthers & intersectional feminist dialecticians engage in systematic analysis. Do either of them end up describing reality very well?

I agree with how you've framed some of the more tradition type of "conspiracy theorists" you've met IRL, but your description also applies to insurrectionary & revolutionary types IRL quite well.

I really don't know that I'd call what 9/11 truthers do "systemic analysis". There was a while when Michael Ruppert was involved with the Peak Oil crowd where one could argue that folks did actually start doing this work, as well as some of the Iraq-war-era Counterpunch stuff but as a general rule conspiracy theories tend to rely a lot more heavily on narratives about the individuals and groups occupying leading positions within systems than the systems themselves. There's more to systemic analysis than stringing together a bunch of words or narratives that indict the system. It's about attempting to understand and explain how and why the system works the way it does, and backing that up with actual evidence, case studies, etc. Conspiracy theories are by their very nature undisprovable - you cannot argue the evidence because the conspiracy has hidden and/or falsified it. They're a matter of faith, not logic. As far as "intersectional feminism" is concerned, I'd say that when done right it's a pretty good example of systemic analysis in that it attempts to make sense of overlapping systems of oppression, but also that a good lot of what passes for "intersectional feminism" today is just liberal bullshit that turns this stuff into personal moral questions. It's worth noting though, that very little of the bullshit suffers from too much analysis, but rather too little.

Also, several anons have pointed out that anarchists, too, tend to be an utterly toxic mess of fucked up individuals. I'm certainly not denying that. I'm just saying that the truthers I know are orders of magnitude worse - like Jerry Springer fucked up.

is an anarchist. Can this be a school? Springerism? I am now a Springerist. Get sprung!

I take your commentary on "what passes for...intersectional feminism" as the effect of mainstreaming. Maybe oversimplyfing, maybe a tired old term, but when things go mainstream they tend to lose all their value, nuance, intrigue.

Jerry Stirner!

*rushes to register this username*

Very true, we had similar experiences with those subcultures. As soon as they emerge from the sewer of the internet, most of the problems turn out to be relatively mundane and sad cases of mental illness.

Sort of like those IWW & revcom gadflies whose speeches we've all had to suffer through in meetings.

Lopez is "red" in the same sense that I am, where we haven't smoked the pipe of individualist-nihilism until we're incapable of a collaboration that doesn't end with us doing a long rant about intellectually superiority before storming off to sulk in our rooms like whiny teenagers.

Anarchism has always had and WILL ALWAYS HAVE tendencies towards community, including people we don't always agree with and all the mess that comes with it. Don't like it? Go back to doing bong-rips of your own farts with Stirner's corpse propped up in the corner, as if anyone gives a fuck haha

How is your anti-intellectual superiority any different, or better, than intellectual superiority?

Is it better to sulk in one's room or sulk on the streets in the form of minor property damage?

Pointing out that intellectual posturing is just vanity with $10 words doesn't equate to anti-intellectualism.

Okay, so substitute anti-intellectual-posturing in my previous comment. How is it different or better than intellectual-posturing?

Also, use of a $10 word is sometimes done in pretense. But sometimes it is the best, most descriptive word for a given context.

Sigh ...Yeah … people use words. Why do you find something more interesting to do? I'm going to.

Anon, really. The OP essentially said "stop acting like you're better than me, you inferior-ones!" I'm pointing out both the contradiction & the pretense of such a statement.

That's ... one way to interpret that post.

Fallacy of Equivocation (red =/= communitarianism) and argumentum ad hominem (graphic image of ostensibly foolish person in place of addressing the original criticisms about "global revolution", "internationalism", and lack of mention of civilization).

I'm not here to have a 2 hour discussion about the trajectory of Lopez's theory, I don't know him well enough, nor am I speaking for him. I'm just slapping back at all the red-baiting that enjoys almost total normalization on this site these days. It's tedious to me.

^Basically this.

Nothing wrong with community, even from an individualist perspective, though that's not necessarily the word I would use to describe what I really want because of all the baggage it carries as well as its heavy connotation with big-tent, populist (red) anarchism...

Fuck populism. "Anarchist" or otherwise.

Also, Stirner rules :)

yeah yeah, congrats, you're smarter than the average liberal. Whoopity fucking doo … as in, anarchists only matter if they DO something besides sit around, congratulating themselves for being slightly smarter than most.

Maybe you do, maybe you don't but "fuck populism, stirner rules" is a pretty god-damn weak position if you aren't actively running with a militant cell, pulling off successful clandestine attacks, bank robberies, etc. I don't know you but I do know most of the jokers around here expend most of their energy on their keyboards.

What has populism ever given us throughout history? Oh, that's right: movement politicians and literally Hitler.

What has Stirner given us throughout history? The Bonnot gang.

Checkmate, motherfucker.

Well this has gotta be the best comment of this whole 17 days!

the anarcho-communist critiques of the bonnot gang are well established. individualist commodity worshipers disinterested in uplifting their fellow man. their anti-semetic attacks upon the banking community I'm sure garners the teutonic approval of the stirnerites, as well.

Self enjoying products and surrogate activities of capitalism and commodity is not the same as worshiping it. They are no more care about their fellow man then their fellow man cares about them. I'm unaware of the antisemitism, however, those views did not exist in a vacuum considering the times.

"their ANTI-SEMETIC attacks upon the banking community I'm sure garners the teutonic approval of the stirnerites, as well."

Citation?

Or do you somehow consider any affront on the institution of banking (a pillar of capitalism, duh) inherently anti-jew? If so, that's pretty ridiculous. Pretty weak of you to throw out such awful unsubstantiated claims at people who aren't around to defend themselves anymore, you back-ass populist twaddle-fuck.

Capital letters at the start of sentences is CAPITALIST! But then again is Jews are THE capitalists then I guess that's fine to CAPITALIZE, or else that'd be ANTISEMETIC!!!

You know it's not "individualist-nihilism" which keeps some people in their rooms away from "the community".

You've forgot how childish or tribal some tightly-knit groups behave, how their collective energies are often overwhelming and intimidating.

You've forgot all these actual narcissist ego-maniacal big babies, sitting on collectively-maintained metaphorical thrones (armchairs) of their "communities", who nobody will dare questioning, always hiding behind their henchwomen, as they're spreading toxic slander campaigns against those "individuals" they don't like (eh... they're probably just Rightists anyways).

You'll notice that not all interpersonal clashes only originate from one side... they must be actually on the rare side.

And what about ME? I'm so great, that's all.... lol

I didn't forget anything and you couldn't resist responding so if I was a troll, I'd be fucking winning by the rules of trolling dumbass. But i'm not, I'm just someone who finds the place to be infested with self-aggrandizing, armchair blowhards and they certainly talk enough so it's easy to provoke them.

So, then... leave?

Different person here. I don't think you're a troll, but you're definitely annoying. Don't get me wrong: some times Sir Einzige or Le Way or whoever will say shit that's like... wtf, dude. As for Emile, I just scroll past their shit w/o fail every time it comes up. The people who really bring the place down imo, are all the shrill pieces of shit who go on and on and on about how much they hate it here (but keep coming back, strangely...), who constantly lose their shit and throw out infinite strawmen and ad-hominems with no argumentative content and who constantly complain about the other posters but who are, themselves, easily 10x more annoying.

Fuck off to r/anarchism or IGD or something?

These types feel entitled to ownership of spaces, places & things that aren't theirs. Even in a few-rules communal sandbox like this place, where there is rarely any ownership invoked beyond occasional moderation & editorializing, they still feel entitled to the space. They read something which upsets them and automatically assume that someone was trying to upset them. Myopic, egotistical types with zero introspection. Their main talent is knowing what to be offended about, and they valorize the act, the mental state, of being offended. The exist in constant shock that no one is quite as offended as they are. After all, how you gonna fuel a rev without a bunch of really offended people?

Thus all they have to offer in discourse is ad hominems, insults, slurs & reminders of how shocked or offended they are. No ideas, no clever satire, no rebuttals or counterarguments. Just teeth gnashing and lamentations.

I'm glad people are saying this. I used to visit this site almost every day, now I visit it less than once a week. What drives me away is not Sir E, emile, Le Way, or even PB when he was around - sometimes those guys can be tiresome, but they are at least genuinely giving their 2 cents. What is really annoying is the teeth gnashing, posturing, ad hominems, and pointless bitching about how much this site supposedly sucks while still visiting it *and* commenting on it (why comment? "to fight the alt-right"?).

Ya know, for a bunch of people who whine incessantly that people aren't faithfully engaging with their arguments, y'all sure seem to have a problem faithfully engaging with other people's arguments. Anyone who doesn't agree is "upset" or "offended". Anyone who speaks out is *only* dealing in "ad hominems, insults and slurs". Yawn. How exactly, the fuck, do you expect people to respond to the kind of vague insinuations and red-baiting contained in posts like the one about "the dark side of Lopez" or "they've gone full spook" with proper Harvard-style debating? Bad faith arguments get bad-faith responses. That's life.

And yes, many of us do engage. The only other thing I've written so far in this mess of responses was the lengthy bit about the history of conspiracy theories and the left. Admittedly, I waste a lot more time than I should researching fringe theories and triple-checking my facts when arguing with this shit, sometimes hours at a time. What do I get for my trouble? Usually just accused of being a government shill. Invariably all the same claims about "ad hominems" get made regardless of how much evidence and how many arguments are thrown at them, so why fucking bother?

The thing about "the dark side of lopez" is sorta on point, tho. A little tongue in cheek, sure. But I think there's still something to be said about how engaging in the WSF is... idk... questionable? The full critiques were made elsewhere in this thread so I won't waste anyones time going through them again on here.

I'm all for critiques of the NGO-left types that make up a lot of the WSF, and it's sure not how I choose to spend my time, but seriously? A whole bunch of solid @s I know were into it at the time. I guess I'm not seeing the scandal. Is this what it takes to get the scarlet letter these days?

Personally, I get pretty suspicious that someone's just red-baiting when they make claims like "the TPP was completely unopposed by summit-hopping types", which is just flat-out untrue.

"at the time" appears to be the key part of your comment, since I was referring to Frank's involvement (in fact a lecture at the WWF on Submedia) that just happened last summer. So we ain't talking about past involvements, long ago, during times where pretty much everyone into summit-hopping was tasting the several flavors of the Left's Chinese buffet. I know we've all grown up, with safe criticism, from this shit, so that's why I'm BAFFLED by apparent anarchists who are still clinging to this shit, in a world where the WSF has lost all its relevance, save perhaps for a tiny, very thin bunch of academic Leftists from well-off social backgrounds.

And granted, TPP was not completely unopposed by the summit-hopping types. There was just NO single counter-summit or major protesting against it, aside than in... East Asian countries or Chile. There was some critical treatment in the press though, and Wikileaks contributed to it... but that kind of spectacular passive critique is nowhere near the counter-summit opposition. Or else point me to one major action/protest/counter-summit against TPP that happened anywhere in North America...

But why bother? It's all bureaucratic decisions. As long as there's no hot air moving upward the political ladder of the State, or that you don't have missiles and bombs to literally throw at the globalist summits, you're pretty much attending just to shout slogans, do the symbolic clown thing, or smashy-smashy.

My experience with 9-11 was when the connection was made to the terror attack and the Mossad all hell broke loose. When the 'truthers' started organizing in solidarity with Palestinians, the hammer came down. All the Rabbi's got our names and numbers. The groups were attacked from within and without. The anti-war movement was also disabled by long term and deep cover bad people....think code pink. We are all Palestinians.

Hows about having community and organization come to anarchy and not the other way around. Simply look at various art and aesthetic forms of organizing(martial arts for example).

Better to have a liberal with anarchist tendencies then someone like Cindy Millstein. Anarchists should organize as anarchists, this does not mean detached individualism(which is effective in its own right).

Ultimately this is the reality. Anarch/ists, or any identity subdivision really, has to operate within a society of other, different, identity subgroups. So we're always gonna be a token something-or-other within any grouping, be they permanent or ephemeral.

Anarchists are the lovers of creative expression, the sharing of surpluses, the laughter of friends, the caring of children, the absence of hierarchy, the passion of commitment, the awareness of the delicate social relationship between reciprocity and culpability,

Who cares about different forms of anarchy...so long as it's not anarco capitalism you should be in the safe circle....now....you can thank trump for making anarchy desirable once again. no time for infighting when we're on a role. It's trump but guess what...when things get worse they actually get better. and when things get better under a democrat they actually get worse because everyone's half asleep at the wheel. We're heading in the right direction. It's gona be an excellent 4 years of mayhem and destruction. Time to vent some steam...get even and plot the next big move for total breakdown of society.

" no time for infighting when we're on a role."

hahahahhhhahahhhahahahaahhhaaaaaaaa!!!!!!!!! perfect!

"so long as it's not anarco capitalism you should be in the safe circle"

yeah, like anarcha-feminism, eh? their safe circle defines authoritarianism, in my experience.

It is a well-known fact that Illuminati consist of Multi Millionaires, Billionaires who have major influence regarding most global affairs, including the planning of a New World Order. Many world leaders, Presidents, Prime Ministers, royalty and senior executives of major Fortune 500 companies are members of Illuminati. join a secret cabal of mysterious forces and become rich with boundless measures of wealth in your company or any given business,the great Illuminati can make everything possible just contact : illuminatikingdom11@gmail.com or Whatsapp/call +2349036492096 or call +1 918-505-9468 EL IAI LEXION Thaddeus I am Vice-President of Citizen Outreach THE ILLUMINATI ORGANIZATION

Do not hesitate to contact us.
Phone number call: +2349036492096 or +1 918-505-9468
Whatsapp: +2349036492096
Email : illuminatikingdom11@gmail.com

BEWARE OF SCAMMERS, THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS MEMBERSHIP FEE AND YOU MUST BE ABOVE THE AGE OF 18YRS.
THANKS…….

TEAM REGARDS
PLAN ILLUMINATION

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.
CAPTCHA
Human?
K
x
L
G
8
s
1
Enter the code without spaces.