What is and what's not anarchist

83 posts / 0 new
Last post
anon (not verified)
What is and what's not anarchist

I'll put it very simply : Don't like or trust solidarity business . On the other side I feel very bad when I observe anarchist movement turns into a new salvation army . Anarchism is not a charity , anarchism is about struggle , to change the world , make it a better place for some , or just fight back against repressive and authoritarian forces . Transferring anarchism into a something about charity or preaching some sort of ethics is a nightmare , it tells a lot of the bankruptcy of other *ideologies* that fail to attract or convince , but at the same time this brings the risk of taking off the credibility or real meaning of anarchism and turning it into another apologist and manipulative tool of some authority or authoritarian force or a would be authority . Another problem with theses trends and currents that they resort to quoting old anarchists or what they consider the founding fathers of anarchism , distorting anarchism even further , as anarchism was always open to new innovations and differences , regardless how exotic they might look . Daring and breaking old presumptions and dogmas were always one of the unique characteristics of anarchism that are threatened by such trends to turn anarchism into a tool of lazy and timid minds and souls .....

Mazen

Fauvenoir (not verified)
Anarchist = Making typos in titles and getting away with it!

In a neolib democracy, a lot of what is assumed to be "anarchist" by more traditional ancom authors doesn't stick much. What is an anarchist's position within a world of law-abiding citizen's (and middle class) morals?

Conflict or opposition to "authority" most of the time will come in the form of being confronted to the ordinary fascism of "good, normal people". The family types, especially, who got a higher stake/entrenchment than others in maintaining the status quo.

You're being confronted to the demeaning moralism of car drivers that behave like they own the roads while you're on your foot, skate or bike seat? You're being looked down upon by well-off liberal lefties living in their exclusive apartments coz you're in the streets? Or being discretely sidelined by Whitey normies due to having a dark skin? These are all little despotisms being mass-produced by a democratic society, that are "frontlines" in a struggle for social reality. Either you steer it in your direction, or you just keep being docile and letting the normal enforce itself down to every nanometer.

Opposition to the democratic order is where it's at. It's no longer just about a single monopolistic order of "robber barons in tuxedos + the President". That's the line drawn between the overcivilized, sheepish social anarchists and what El Errante called "pure black anarchy".

Wayne Price (not verified)
What is anarchism? Who wants to know?

I agree with Mazen that "anarchism is not a charity; anarchism is about struggle, to change the world...." I don't know if he is criticizing anarchists who focus on helping others, forming "mutual aid" organizations, etc. If so, I only partly agree. These are good and important things to do, but a strategy for changing the world requires a greater emphasis on conflict and popular struggle.

I do not agree with his criticisms of anarchists who "resort to quoting old anarchists or what they consider the founding fathers of anarchism". Sure, anarchism has had to change to keep up with the changes of capitalism and the state and other forms of oppression. But there is no point in re-inventing the wheel. We can stand on the shoulders of giants, if only to see further than they did. If you want a brand new ideology, unconnected to past achievements and insights, why on earth do you bother to call it by the name of the tradition of "anarchism." Why not make up a new name (anarchism is not so popular after all)?

anon (not verified)
It's not about "re-inventing

It's not about "re-inventing the wheel", you control-freak dickhead, but about *learning from history*.

Ya know, things like Krotpotkin and his alliance with Bolcheviks... Mussolini's fascism being rooted in national liberation from the Left libertarian side... CNT-FAI allying with the socialist republicans... Maknovists being betrayed by Trotsky... On. And on. And on. And on. And on.

anon (not verified)
Also Stirner betrayed by

Also Stirner betrayed by Bookchin.

anon (not verified)
aaaaah...

Muhricans and their notorious "knowledge" of history. ;)

Wayne Price (not verified)
Re-inventing anarchist history

This post is a perfect example of the reason we should learn from history in order to repeat anarchist successes and not our failures.

Kropotkin was not in an "alliance with Bolsheviks". See his essay on the Bolsheviks, "How Not to Make a Revolution."

Mussolini's fascism was "rooted in national liberation from the Left libertarian side." He was an Italian *nationalist* but not an advocate of "national liberation" either for Italy (which was already an independent nation) or for African countries which he wanted Italy to conquer.

The CNT-FAI did ally with social democrats, republicans, and Stalinists. You got that right, although a minority of anarchists opposed this policy. However this proves the value of examining anarchist history so that we do not repeat this blunder.

Yes, the Maknovists were betrayed by the Communist army, led by Trotsky. This too teaches lessons of how to deal with authoritarian forces in revolutionary situations.

If your point is that we should "learn from history" not to trust state socialists and authoritarian leftists, I am fully in agreement, but I think we need to learn a whole lot more if we want to make an anarchist revolution.

anon (not verified)
"However this proves the

"However this proves the value of examining anarchist history so that we do not repeat this blunder.'

while i have no problem with examining anarchist history, doing so is not necessary for critical thinkers and astute observers to avoid making the mistake of aligning with known enemies.

anon (not verified)
Wayne declares that there

Wayne declares that there have been "anarchist successes" (please note the plural). I'm curious Wayne, what are one or two of these? The projects must be rife with incidents we can all wave our anarchist flags for so that we may continue on the righteous path of anarchist revolution (you forgot to trademark that). Or did I miss something in Anarchist History 101? Please enlighten the rest of us poor fools about the glorious successes of history's biggest losers (and I say that as a loyal principled anarchist -- who just doesn't see any successes in our history).

Okay, I'll start with a few losses, blunders, and failures. Maybe Wayne can show us that I'm mistaken about them.
1. First International: outmaneuvered and expelled by Marx and Engels
2. Mexican Revolution: hoodwinked by Carranza and the Constitutionalists into fighting the original Zapatistas
3. Chinese Revolution: succumbed to the nationalism of the KMT or the Communism of the Maoists
4. Russian Revolution: hoodwinked, outmaneuvered and hunted/suppressed by the Bolsheviks
5. Spanish Revolution: hoodwinked, flattered, outmaneuvered, hunted/suppressed by the Republicans, Socialists, and Communists
6. IWW: outmaneuvered by centralizers and Communists
7. New Left (internationally): outmaneuvered, sidelined, ridiculed and snitched out by Maoists and other Stalinists
8. neo-Platformism/especifismo: imploded through internal contradictions regarding the hierarchical vanguard role of a self-described revolutionary cadre, rigid ideological conformism related to organizationalist fixation and the issue of "national liberation" and/or racism
9. post-Seattle (USA): failure to create any long-lasting specifically anarchist influence by retreating into unpaid social work and electoralism
10. Occupy (USA): outflanked by fetishizers of Non-Violence and retreating into unpaid social work and electoralism

But I'm ready willing and able to learn about anarchist successes I missed. I'll wait...

anihilist (not verified)
You both has idiotic ideas of

You both has idiotic ideas of anarchy if any of this matters to you.

anon (not verified)
Yessssss down with the

Yessssss down with the culture of messing with things on both sides and instead whys you don't just leave it to balance out in its own parochial way!?

Wayne Price (not verified)
Anarchist Successes?

Anon 21:01 asks when has anarchism ever succeeded? Of course, anarchism has failed. We do not live in the delights of anarchy or of any sort of socialism (however defined). After more than two centuries, we still live under capitalism and the state. So anarchism has not succeeded. But then, nothing has succeeded. Despite Marxism, social democracy, liberalism, nationalism, internationalism, all the religions, conservatism, etc. and so on, humanity is now facing destruction from global overheating and ecological disaster, plus the continuing possibility of nuclear war.

So if I refer to "success" I am referring to limited victories, periods of success, from which we might learn lessons. As we could learn lessons from our failures. As Rosa Luxemburg said somewhere, all revolutions fail except the last.

At times, in countries around the world, anarchists have led mass movements, built large union associations, organized anarchist federations, inspired self-managed industrial and agricultural communities, and led military formations. These tend to be written out of history and ignored, especially on the left. But they are our successes. We can learn from them as well as our defeats.

anon (not verified)
oh great, another reading

oh great, another reading comprehension fail from Wayne. the other anon asked for specific examples of "anarchist successes" and all Wayne can do is list a few vague platitudes without making any of them specific. which mass movements? which large union associations? are they the same thing? which anarchist federations? which self-managed industrial and agricultural communities? as far as leading military formations, there are some anarchists who are opposed to militarism; in fact, the vast majority of anarchists through history have been anti-militarist. maybe Wayne missed that class in anarchist school, which is why he thinks that Ukrainian anarchists fighting alongside Ukrainian nationalists is a perfectly fine thing.
yeah, those anarchist movements, unions, federations, and industrial communities tend to be written out of history, but Wayne, can't you understand that you haven't done one little thing to correct these omissions? not naming any of them, situating them geographically or chronologically, or letting any of us know what, where, when, or why these movements existed is pretty much the same as ignoring them.
stop being coy. IF you know something about these things, provide us with names, places, and dates. without this information how the fuck are the rest of us supposed to discern if they were successes?
oh, and your entire first paragraph is classic whataboutism, totally irrelevant, a red (and i do mean red) herring. what a joke.

Wayne (not verified)
Anarchist Successes

I did not think it necessary on an anarchist site such as this to go into the history of anarchist organizing around the world, providing names, places, and dates. Nor do I have the space. Read a book or two.

Is it necessary to refer to the self-managed industries organized during the Spanish revolution? Or the syndicalist federations created in France, Italy, Spain, or Latin America? Or the fight for the 8 hour day led by U.S. anarchists? Or the armed forces (militias) organized by Makhno or Durruti or the anti-Japanese Korean anarchist militias? Or the anarcho-syndicalist organizing in South Africa? Or the anarchist organizing on every continent but Antarctica and most countries?

Tp repeat, none of these led to successful anarchist revolutions and reorganizing of societies. We still live under capitalism and the state, not to mention racism and sexism, and under the threat of environmental cataclysm and nuclear war. Yet for periods, we have had our successes and these are worth learning from.

anon (not verified)
You missed this vey important

You missed this vey important for mankind anarch success Wayne. The rumor, a very very possible event before States, Gods or Bosses existed, the likelyhood that a proto-÷anarchist invented the wheel which propelled mankind into the moden industrial environment of the State's political exisent.

Wayne (not verified)
Early anarchy

Well yes, for most of human existence people lived in small groups, as hunter-gatherers or even as early agriculturalists in villages. There were no states, or classes, or bosses, and very limited markets if at all. So it is possible for people to live without states or classes or markets. The problem is do this at a higher level of productivity, with leisure and plenty for all. I think this is possible, and have believed so ever since I read Paul Goodman and Lewis Mumford some decades ago. They persuaded me that it was potentially possible to have a decentralized, cooperative, and radically democratic society using properly chosen technology. So I still believe.

Avril Lavigne (not verified)
Do you know where your rare

Do you know where your rare earth minerals come from, bro? Maybe Wayne’s World is full of free range lithium and PCBs grow on trees. but here they come from human, animal, and environmental devastation. “Properly choose” deez, Wayne.

anon (not verified)
For all his anarchic rhetoric

For all his anarchic rhetoric, Wayne remains mired in fully Marxist categories like productive forces as things to keep developing, of technology as a boon to humanity, to political economy as a methodology of analysis based on the idiotic LTR, and to Revolution as a discreet series of mass events that culminate in the overthrow of capitalism. Never mind that many anarchists (and an increasingly number of left/anti-state/anti-Party Marxists) reject work, production, and a blinkered obeisance to industrialism and the continued despoliation of the natural world (that includes lots of humans too). Just as his anti-imperialism is stuck in the 1890s, so too is his industrial anarchism.

anon (not verified)
"blinkered obeisance"

"blinkered obeisance"

I want you inside me

anon (not verified)
There are times when I'm

There are times when I'm amazed at my own wordsmithing. I'm gratified that I can begin to seduce you with it ;-)

Wayne (not verified)
Alternative, libertarian, humanistic use of technology

So I say that I believe it is "potentially possible to have a decentralized, cooperative, and radically democratic society using properly chosen technology."
And I am accused of advocating "a blinkered obeisance to industrialism and the continued despoliation of the natural world ."

There is no arguing with such people.

anon (not verified)
21:22 commenter here Wayne. I

21:22 commenter here Wayne. I was clicking through some of the threads and came across an older comment I made a couple of weeks ago, a comment with infused with intense dry sarcastic intent which was missed by many readers.
Really, Proto-Anarch Paleolithic wheel production?!

anon (not verified)
" So it is possible for

" So it is possible for people to live without states or classes or markets. The problem is do this at a higher level of productivity, ...."

wow. that is a HUGE leap of logic. why introduce a "problem" that comes with such obvious and massive downsides (hierarchy, specialization, surplus, resource extraction, etc)

Wayne (not verified)
Why Higher Productivity?

The first question is whether increased productivity necessarily requires "hierarchy, specialization, surplus, resource extraction, etc" I believe, as do many other anarchists and decentralists, that this is not necessarily true if a deliberate effort is made for an alternate use. This is not an issue to be decided by assertion but requires research and discussion.

What are the advantages of increased productivity? Greater leisure for a large number of people. The merger of creative work and play, labor and art, in craftsmanship for all. The development of human potentialities. Face-to-face communities of human scale which are still in world-wide communication. A better way of being human.

anon (not verified)
different person here

what exactly does "alternative use" mean? I think this part is all wrong:

"What are the advantages of increased productivity? Greater leisure for a large number of people. The merger of creative work and play, labor and art, in craftsmanship for all. The development of human potentialities. Face-to-face communities of human scale which are still in world-wide communication. A better way of being human."

I think the history of technology has shown that greater amount of productivity always involves more work, my ideal for an "anarchist future" would be more equal distribution of labor (ie, less hierarchy) and less productivity.

Wayne (not verified)
"History of technology?"

Except that there is no such thing as a "history of technology" distinct from a history of class society. It was not industrialism which created capitalism. It was capitalism which created industrialism. Capitalism made industrialism possible and industrialism made capitalism possible (interacting). So too, a libertarian socialist society would use machines, science, and the principles of engineering in a way which fits "more equal distribution of labor (i.e. less [no] hierarchy)." And ecological balance.

anon (not verified)
lol, I was just saying that throughout

the existence of technology, it does reduce the amount of work. If you have industrial level equipment, then it needs repairs and maintenance, the machines create an entire field of work unto itself. I would still like to know what "alternative use" means to you.

Bayne (not verified)
Why is a higher level of

Why is a higher level of productivity desirable for your anarchist fantasy?

anon (not verified)
higher levels of productivity

higher levels of productivity (of course under worker stt we of-management) has always been the 19th/early 20th century socialist fantasy. Wayne and every other anarcho-leftist remains wedded to the archaic and wholly outdated and inappropriate (see: climate change and environmental devastation) marxist dogma of the full development of the productive forces so that a society based on leisure can finally be realized. worker self-management of environmentally destructive industries can't possibly slow - let alone reverse - environmental destruction. it's inherent in most industrialism; no amount of self-management by the federation of oil transporters (for example) can prevent leaks, derailments, shipping accidents, or the poisoning of aquifers. but the myopic marxists will always see that as a small price to pay for rational (based on a technocratic bureaucracy) productivism. fuck these industrial maniacs.

anon (not verified)
There ain't nothing wrong

There ain't nothing wrong with anarchist charity.

I've been to my share of food not bombs. Good work those folk have done, especially in the sense of bringing people together on the more or less equal footing of the dining hall.

Fauvenoir (not verified)
Charity is 100% politics, free-sharing is anti-politics, tho

"equal footing" means solidarity or just free-sharing. That's not what charity is about...

Charity is always about a caste or group having privileged access to goodies, then through inherently exclusive bureaucratic gimmicks is redistributing goodies in a controlled manner.

There was the example of me bringing what I could on a bike with panniers to a local food charity. Said food charity were too stiff and restricted in their structure to respond to my pressuring of just fucking let me install a fridge outside and allow to plug it in their offices. Because Covid.

Yet in another city you had several free fridges where I finally could manage bringing food for those without proper means of transport to go across town for dumpster-diving side quests. I of course, like the groups doing the same, kept some goodies for my own enjoyment. The management of these fridges was still subjected to hierarchic bureaucracies, who stupidly depended on General Assemblies to be able to keep these fridges running. So this was only a more open form of charity to their pov, while it was allowing me and some other urban hunter/gatherers to do a bit of solidarity.

FnB has had some issues like these too... being subjected to small controlling groups, and given the fact cooking labor is involved this sets a framework for being more exclusive (or selective) as to who you're doing shit with. So it's never really free sharing, just a somewhat more accessible and "grassroots" form of charity.

As with Nietzsche's former analogy on apples (the one taking the apple first from the tree has a de facto "right" to eat it in the face of others who came later), there's a kind of "natural" inequity that's present through all species. BUT, as with the case of why food stores restrict access to dumpsters, or food bank bureaucracies controlling access to the food given to them by these stores (and then still throwing the surplus away like idiots, anyways) there's always an option to acknowledge the free goodies for what they are, free goodies, and it's no difference to you if they're being digested in someone's belly or rot somewhere in a land fill, or at best compost bin. So restriction at this point becomes hostile and irrational despotism.

anon (not verified)
You could say that potlatch

You could say that potlatch was mutual charity in the broadest sense, a cultural custom of distributing wealth, in the same way the IMF does. Ultimately, only a wild mountain man a free food bearing range could be said to be non-political.
Food not Bombs and The Salvation Army are parallel.

lumpy (not verified)
you -could- say the IMF is

you -could- say the IMF is like a potlatch but that doesn't mean you should... ya fukin troll

anon (not verified)
lol! An international bank calls together memebers of the tribe,

known as the global community, and selflessly distributes copies of microsoft and vaccines for the third world X-D, free of any conditions! I like that imagery better than what the IMF actually does!

Fauvenoir (not verified)
Potlatch at least in the more

Potlatch at least in the more modern sense is a form of commoning, in a rather free-sharing way. I've read that traditionally they used to be more a kins of inter-communal food competition, like we have at country fairs, where every clan competes for the most elaborate/delicious food, as since this was already a bartering and commoning economy, food practically came without a price on it. The libcap gonna say, "wait, no way to get rich out of such economy!"

But who cares... the goal is to eat well and enjoy it, right? Normie dumbfucks are hard-convinced they need to get richer for this. In other news two years ago a had a toast of expensive maple whiskey provided freely by Mother Anarchy by a dumpster with my favorite female friend just to celebrate the New Year. Crime pays, I tell ya! Especially when petty, yes.

anon (not verified)
",,,where every clan competes

",,,where every clan competes for the most elaborate/delicious food, as since this was already a bartering and commoning economy,,,"
Yeah, and then the all too human vanity and pride enters the arena, creates a virtue/quality hierarchical competition (like the way Eur/USA used to compete with Japan which led to war, and the West/China today).
I'll stick with the wild free spirited humble Mountain Man ideal thanku very much.

anon (not verified)
Hit me up for a "wild free

Hit me up for a "wild free spirited humble Mountain Man"philosophical guided tour (with Zen DASEIN taoist vegan yoga jiu-jitsu and all that), when I'm back to my mountain lyfe at some point.

anon (not verified)
like you, a big part of my critique of things, and the state,

rests in a pretty huge dislike of bureaucracy and excuses to compartmentalize resources in a very anal way. I kinda wanted to start a "Food not Churches" project around where i live, but it would mean that i would be cooking for all these people who didn't ask me to do so, and i would be antagonizing christians, neither are a great idea in and of themselves.

anon (not verified)
...or you can just become

...or you can just become Sikh and do the same. Then cause a local religious war due to Xians being too much useless moral cucks to do free food... and then when both groups eradicate each other you just laught it up on the ashes and brinng more dumpster food in the name of our one true god, Mother Anarchy!

anon 31# (not verified)
great idea! Except for i don't know how to become a sikh beyond

not eating and die X-D, cuz ya know, it's violent to micro-organisms! Maybe antagonizing Christians is STILL a good idea!

anon (not verified)
In anarchist ethnic

In anarchist ethnic identarian circles, its cooler to pursue a sadhu lifestyle with is non hierarchal and anti-church.

Bayne (not verified)
"free-sharing is anti

"free-sharing is anti-politics"

This statement is an inherent, blatant contradiction. Read over the definitions for politics and the contradiction will be obvious.

anon (not verified)
It's political as far as it

It's political as far as it is "anti-politics". But beyond that... how political is it? Please describe the politics you're seeing here, assuming that politics means the management of people (the "city") by some other people...

I see that likely some communist convictions are making you see the politics in everything, and it is very self-serving to a view where you want the totality to under your management.

anon (not verified)
Free food is anarchy!

Free food is anarchy!

anon (not verified)
Also no fences is anarchy,

Also no fences is anarchy, and no landlords!

anon (not verified)
Also feces are anarchy, and

Also feces are anarchy, and no landfills (except for feces landfills a.k.a humanure hills)!

SirEinzige
Agro-Industrial anarchism ain’t happening Wayne

A lot has changed since Proudhon and company formulated these ideas 160+ years ago. The corporatist green revolution happened which simply isn’t done without a state.

In terms of radically restructuring Proudhon and company you would have to think in terms of horto-craft-industrial network federations but these cannot be scaled to societal levels. We are talking human scale a term used by Goodman which I don’t think you entirely understand. This ain’t societal or societarian.

SoreEgregore (not verified)
So much has changed. These

So much has changed. These Proudhon cucks are formulatedly retarding the understanding with their measley 160+ year Francophonic cuck analysis. Every egregore knows that a horto-craft-industrial radical centrism of at least 10000+ year analysis is required. The human socieo-societarian scale isn''t even comprehended to anarch pedo egregorian satisfaction if you cuck like Wayne. Every egregore knows this.

anon (not verified)
Happy to see you're still alive!

Seriously, lol. Agro-industrial anarchy would theoretically be an outgrowth of what Peter Kropotkin talked about in "The Conquest of Bread", but it never materialized because agro-industrial relies on centralized authority and some form of slavery. Some efforts have been made with cooperatives but it all just relies on the same monetary system, no escaping this reality!

anon (not verified)
There's no monetary system if

There's no monetary system if the food is free, or bartered. The industrial side is to take the tedium out of planting and harvesting by hand.
It doesn't have to be a massive bureaucratic process, especially if the machinery is free also.
Everything suddenly becomes easy with capitalism gone!

anon (not verified)
Yeah, every study of crisis

would come to that conclusion, if it were brought to that conclusion. The problem with machinery is it does rely on some centralization of effort, and that wouldn't be an issue without rigid authorities.

anon (not verified)
06/24/2022 - 08:12

When capitalism is gone and everything becomes easy, where is all the energy to run an operations like that all over going to come from? Do you believe people will just obtain the materials to produce enough energy willingly, even though the high likelihood of adverse and grave affects to their health? Do you think the people living in areas where the materials are obtained will be a-okay with their home turned into a polluted wasteland or would they just be expected to take one for the team and move? Or will they do both on location? Why would this not turn into a bureaucratic nightmare?

anon (not verified)
Let's face it as anarchs,

Let's face it as anarchs, capitalism will never completely go, look at the evolution of China, redefine capitalism, and realize that the greedy lazy human will always promote neo-capitalist ventures into the future.
But the climate will force people to make do, bury their dead, and move on, look around, they've been doing it since the birth of cognition.

anon (not verified)
"Teh Climate" to me is just

"Teh Climate" to me is just same-old doomsday prophecy brandished as failed scare tactic on the ultra-rich by liberals. Kinda like what Xians been doing for ages...

Teh Climate is sure getting fucked up, but before destroying civilization it is, in some countries, destroying the lives of thousands, if not millions of poor people, while the managerial and financial castes who usually aren't giving a fuck... still aren't giving a fuck.

U gotta come up with something more hard-hitting than Xian tactics...

anon (not verified)
The whole "becoming easy" bit, and im

Just guessing because I didn't write it, refers to a more direct understanding of what to do...

Your reasons stated above are why I don't have hope for anarchism being more than some personal exploration or lifestyle, maybe you get lucky and find friends with a similar outlook. If you're worried about future hypothetical involving large numbers of people and bureaucracies, I suppose you could always vote or start an organization. The latter honestly sounds more fun.

anon (not verified)
#33, dude... beyond #34's

#33, dude... beyond #34's comment which is true, the Conquest of Bread is quite literally what Zapata's gang did in old school Mexico.

This indirectly caused this supermassive agro boom of the following decades, with an endless loop of mass reproduction/mass agro production. Coz the "pueblo" knows no fucking limits to what they gonna do to the Earth.

Hence they end up with a massively contaminated land and especially waters... to a point you get sick only by rincing your mouth after brushing teeth. And nowadays the local murderous violence is directed at those standing in the way of this industry, i.e. green activists anf feminists...

Zapata who!?

anon (not verified)
So you are taking 01:06

So you are taking 01:06 seriously,,,,,,a troll seriously?,,,,,,,,,,,Seriously.

anon (not verified)
Apparently, deleted comments

Apparently, deleted comments made #33 fall to Ziggie's comment, it as a reply to another one.

anon (not verified)
*gasps* I'm new here but isn

*gasps* I'm new here but isn't the quick solution to this is to use an anon's time signature to identify the comment one is replying to,,,,,solved!

anon (not verified)
NooOo I'm not referring to

NooOo I'm not referring to this "Ziggie" as the culprit troll, but the egregorist moron all over this thread!

anon (not verified)
With history as evidenced, I

With history as evidenced, I feel that the complete authentic anarch(ist) should have total empathy, be critical analysts, and regard every stranger as a potential fascist!

anon (not verified)
i laughed about this response reflixively, because viewing

every stranger as a potential fascist seems to go against having "total empathy", but this is basically what i've been going for since my conversion to anarchy, or anarchist philosophy if you think i haven't "arrived". I give everyone the benefit of the doubt to the greatest degree possible, but i also suspect everyone of being a potential fascist who might try to sell me something or kidnap me.

and to Mazad, the initiator of the thread...quit your worryin', cuz we're all gonna die despite the failures of the anarchist cause. Every failure for organizations and capitalist enterprise is a victory for anarchy! And yes, they live in a constant state of collapse as Lord Guy Debord pointed out!

Surf's Up (not verified)
A large chunk of anarchism

A large chunk of anarchism and anarchists appears to be stuck in the mid 19th century to early 20th century. It's like it hasn't adapted with the times. The anarchists love reading and quoting people like Bukanan, Krapotokin. Makhno, Proudhon, Rocker texts like it's holy scripture and trying to convince others they must adhere to the traditions of anarchism socialism professed by those anarchists. It's like this bizarre fusion of anarchism and conservatism and it's off putting. Then these anarchists insist everything and anything that isn't in agreement with those texts and anarchists is evidence of "facsicist creep." A blind class aristocracy.

We're in the 21st century. History doesn't repeat beyond superficialities. As far as I'm aware, anarchism hasn't had any successes so far. The Spanish civil war isn't much success. Reading about the anarchist failures then won't be much benefit to people now. Those situations won't repeat, but the anarchist failures will. Whatever anarchism is it sure hasn't adapted with time. It's tired

UnexpectedNoU (not verified)
No u

No u

cobwebbyskeleton (not verified)
*slowly lifts skeleton arm

*slowly lifts skeleton arm and points toward the dark and dusty door*

Wayne Price (not verified)
Wipe Out

Surf's Up claims that a big problem with today's anarchists is their quoting the classical anarchists and insisting on others adhering to their traditions. I am puzzled why SU says this. It is certainly not my experience on this list site. If one just goes through recent discussions there will be few references to the classical anarchists or insistence on following their original ideas. Too few in my opinion. But this is just a matter of fact.

Nor do I see many (or any) references to the dangers of "fascist creep." Where is this coming from?

SU concludes by insisting that anarchism has never worked and never will work. Obviously this would require a longer discussion than can be had here. In any case, it is simply an assertion. Similar to "capitalism has not worked and will not work for an extended period of time."

anon (not verified)
SU's post overral is kinda dumb, even though anarchists do tend

to lend too much importance to history.

The "fascist creep" is more or less a fictional caricature invented by ARR, so i don't see why we have to pay respects to it, especially considering that ARR's analysis contains even more bullshit than that:

https://thegrayzone.com/2021/03/14/anarchist-alexander-reid-ross-cops-ci...

anon (not verified)
ur wrongright here...

ARR did set up an overexagerrated bogeyman as far as his notion of "fascist creep" goes, but there ARE fascist creeps preying and trolling over Anews and other radical or anarchisty online outlets.

If you can't see them, years into it, I'm wondering if this ain't more self-biased denial coming from one of them (you?)?

I lend importance to history because it tends to repeat itself...

anon (not verified)
I don't see how my personal philosophical

in any way resembles fascism, plus right ideology doesn't get a whole lot of leg room on here sooo I'd think it's not the greatest place to identify them...unless you would consider hating white people to be fascist which I don't. Are anarcho-capitalists fascist creeps? I'm overall confused by the definition...are we just referring to cops as ARR seemed to work for?

anon (not verified)
Oh, plus, you don't read very carefully

I said "more or less" just because we have no reason to trust ARR, "fascist creep" could be anything you want it to be if you believe in it. And it's really funny to me that me doubting ARR lead to you suspecting that I am a facist creep, but you're probably just "preying on this website by trolling", lmfao.

anon (not verified)
What I wrote on ARR:

What I wrote on ARR:

"ARR did set up an overexagerrated bogeyman as far as his notion of "fascist creep" goes"

Does it sound to you like a quote from someone who feels we shouldn't doubt (at least) ARR?

No. ARR to me is a confused liberal libcom who's been right as many times as a broken clock. Namely with Michael Schmidt and with Death in June.

Besides this, his collaboration with state "experts" was a wrongheaded, dumb idea, but unlike that over-accusatorial claims of his detractors, that doesn't mean he's a state tool. Just a fool who fell in his own game, as the papers he contributed to also helped putting the US radical Left in the same bin as the Far Right.

Additionally, the "Red-Brown" alliance does seem to exist, but all ARR did was to help it, by throwing a bunch of grossly made-up allegations at what appears to be the wrong people, instead of looking at a well-documented group, the Order of Nine Angles, who is known for infiltrating their enemies' organizations, from the Church to anarchist groups and other radical Left.

lumpy (not verified)
yeah, definitely ARR has a

yeah, definitely ARR has a few screws loose or he's a con artist or both.

the peak of the anti-vax rhetoric did a lot to convince me that the "red brown alliance" does exist ... mostly as a new bridge built by The Algorithm(tm) between far left and far right media silos.

don't suppose you have any reading material about these "O9A infiltrations"? my understanding was they have a weird doctrine where they breakdown the psyches of their adherents by getting them to LARP completely different and opposite ideologies... to cause like ... fashy woo ego death while they live in a cave or whatever?

sadly i'm not kidding lol but maybe i got trolled by whoever was writing about this shit

anon (not verified)
"reading material about these

"reading material about these "O9A infiltrations"

I took this from official reports on them, as well as the wiki page. This is consistent with their ideology of using the "extremes" on all sides in order to bring down civilization.... but toward ethno-national feudal rules.

lumpy (not verified)
meant like, can you post any

meant like, can you post any links to these "reports"? besides wikipedia? i've read a bit about them, always interested in more

anon (not verified)
there's also perhaps some mild or

major similarities between the reds and browns, in terms of ambition, and totalizing rhetoric. A "fascist creep" I guess would be an infiltrator that wants to either recruit members or muddy the progress of other organizations...I guess one is no longer a creep if their ulterior motives become obvious.

anon (not verified)
I never said he was a state tool, and yes

You gave a pretty huge nod to this mysterious "fascist creep":

"If you can't see them, years into it, I'm wondering if this ain't more self-biased denial coming from one of them (you?)?"

If you think @news is some sort of an anarchist training camp, then yes you are also an idiot. I don't need to figure out who I am just because you are afraid of people and insecure.

anon (not verified)
Anarchy is a prediction.

Anarchy is a prediction. Having no government is the only requirement. No government can survive without taxes. Anarchy will come with post scarcity.

Luke from DC (not verified)
How about communities creating no-go zones for the cops?

During the 1980's and 1990's, DC's traditional LGBTQ community had to fight a coalition of gentrifying monagamous Gay men and real estate barons. This got to the point that monagamous Gay men on Ridge street were calling the cops on transgender sex workers on K st, and Dupont area condo owners were screaming at the US Park Police to get us "cruising Gay men" out of the woods so their condo values would go up. The former we did not manage to stop, but we defeated the latter offensive. Since we didn't hold the line on gentrification we lost our larger community but still have a toehold in a few key spots.

At that time DC's government was mostly nonfunctional and since Stonewall (and not just in DC) we had taken and held territory in which such things as liquor laws affecting Gay bars were effectively unenforcible. This was similar to 800 years ago, when times of pollitical instability in Europe caused barons to build castles. Kings had trouble getting rid of the castles when the instability passed. Our "castles" were these LGBTQ neighborhoods, which held out for decades after Stonewall.

One tactic used in DC was to play off the DC and Federal governments against each other. If the Feds wanted to raid clubs (e.g. in 1984), they could be targetted for disrespecting Home Rule. If the DC government targetted us, the game flipped to threatening to "go to Congress" reminding them that Congressmen of that era partied in DC and maybe we could "get a better deal" from them. This was highly effective in shutting down things like liquor law inspections of Gay bars.

In a wooded area popular with Gay men, it was queer anarchists who bottomlined defense, holding the US Park Police mostly at bay for a whole decade. Very basic measures included teaching others in the woods simple army manual tactics. Mostly this was how to take advantage of rough terrain and the mixture of outside lights and darkness. We could see at night, the cops came in night-blind from the city and could not. We could run on trails at night, they could not. When things got too hot, we went after the condo owners and businessmen who were the only reason the Park Police ever came in there at all.

The result was a near-exclusion zone against the police, created in reaction to an attempt to close the park at night. If they came in in a large, defensible patrol, we melted away only to return as soon as they left. They had not the strengh to garrison the place, we were the ones who could be there all the time.

Right around 2000, things started getting untenable. The rest of the neighborhood was gentrified around us, club scenes were dying out, so we had fewer defenders. A failed attempt by the Dupont Circle Citizen's Association to shut down a popular bar (Mr P's on P st) was followed by a renewed police offensive using larger patrols backed by helicopters and possibly night vision gear, though limited in effectiveness by terrain and blocked lines of sight. Just when we were on the verge of defeat, Sep 11, 2001 forced the Park Police to redeploy to the major monuments. DC was interesting it that it was real estate greed not religious bigotry that led to trouble for us.

Now dangerous times are on us. In GOP-leaning states like Texas and Florida, we have enemies calling for wiping us out entirely. Tennesee has introduced a bill to make drag shows a felony. Texas has made parents of trans kids into fugitives from "child protective services." DeSantis in Florida is trying to catch up with Abbot in Texas. Won't stop w trans folks, YOU are next if you are not cishet and married or celibate. Thus, we shall have to stand our ground and hold the line. Again we need to create defensible communities, safe behind defenses strong enough to price out attackers.

anon (not verified)
JFC, it's exhausting to read

JFC, it's exhausting to read about all of Luke's Good Works. His activist resume is so overblown and filled with, uh, victories? it's a wonder that the entire US government and its capitalist infrastructure hasn't crumbled under the weight of his extensive attacks. Just one more pro-war campaign and it will surely collapse along with imperialism.

anon (not verified)
Brother Luke, can you tell us

Brother Luke, can you tell us again about that time you were in the shit and defeated an entire battalion of Proud Boys with nothing more than a half-eaten burrito, a few choice IWW songs, and an ice cold stare?

anon (not verified)
I like Luke’s stories, even

I like Luke’s stories, even if overblown;I think he’s one of the most interesting people on this site, which I think used to be a lot more noticeably queer…

I don’t get why he opposes fascism in the US and supports it in Ukraine though, this seems to be common among anarcho clout chasers who enjoy repeating their own name a lot!

Wayne Price (not verified)
Thanks

Luke, Thanks for the interesting pieces of history, which bring theory down to earth.

As for the fool who accuses you of supporting fascism in Ukraine, such remarks are simply beneath contempt.

anon (not verified)
I reckon if you put Wayne or

I reckon if you put Wayne or Luke in the ring with Stirner if he was still alive they would have had their asses whooped, despite all their strugglismo fighting talk, they can't do the walk!

Add new comment

Filtered HTML

  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <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.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
1
h
Y
U
3
t
b
r
Enter the code without spaces.