TOTW: Anarchist Intimacy

Intimacy is a loaded word, but I’ll offer a passing definition if only as a first attempt to frame this topic: let’s say intimacy includes all the ways we choose to include others in the making of ourselves and our immediate contexts. But due to finite time and energy to dedicate to such efforts, priorities are established, and whatever makes the cut—this “letting people in”—could be called intimate. Feel free to disagree or add your own definition. This is only a starting point.

An on-going joke between close friends is that an “anarchist intimacy” could be reduced to CRIME and SEX much of the time. This is (arguably) funny as a gross oversimplification, but like many “bad” jokes that make me laugh, I find a glint of truth in it. If we’re to assume anarchists are attracted to extremes, it only follows that their preferred forms of intimacy take the same shape, right?

But, alas, extremes don’t fill up the calendar of my everyday (yet!). There’s time in between. The passing hours and days can be quite boring, in fact. “We can live without passion or dreams—that is the great liberty this society offers us.” And as individuals interested in challenging dominant forms of intimacy (coupledom, Family, commodities, etc.), a void can exist that doesn’t feel very intimate.

So while I attempt to build an everyday overflowing with extremity, I resolve to pass the time in an interesting way, if only to escape ennui, with an emphasis on cultivating intimate relations between anarchists.

How would you define an “anarchist intimacy,” if it’s to exist at all? What are its obvious forms and in what ways is it underperformed? How do we (or don’t we) practice such a thing?

Listen to the TOTW discussion here!

There are 42 Comments

is a joke bad if it makes you laugh? funny jokes always have some truth. otherwise, what?

I think lots of anarchist culture and spaces has a problem with toxic masculinity. Either as a coping mechanism from trauma, insurrectionary ideas often as a cover for the behavior and other such things. So I see the idea of anarchist intimacy being sex and crime is a issue of the toxic masculinity problem. Because of toxic masculinity is often relationships where sex is the main if not only focus.

For me personally intimacy comes from challenging the ideas of a toxicly masculine society and the defense mechanism people put up. Compassion, caring and intimacy is deeply important. Often gets covered up or forgot in the fire explosion insurrectionary rhetoric.

I say this often but I want more nihilists who bake cookies and are emotionally caring than those who spend their time posting memes with gun wojacks and voicing up. Both are cool and important don't get me wrong.

But yes interpersonal relationships could be way better. And for me getting rid of that shell and defense mechanism is hard but some of the more enjoyable things I have done

Sorry, Lettuce I don't understand how compassion works, as everything I see around me is just the cold grind of society. How do you define it, or what it means to be "compassionate'" in daily life, while avoiding to look ingenuine? That looks like something quite hard to do from my stand point of being a chronic misfit.

Sorry!? Do you even understand the feelings involved with saying "SORRY"?! It's called "compassion". It's about caring for the wellbeing of another you silly misfit dimwit !

No u.

Idk care for and be nice to people in ur life. It's kinda complicated but it's pretty simple to pick up as u practice.

If people perceive you as I genuinely oh well. The sucks for them

I feel this 100%. " Compassion, caring and intimacy is deeply important." yes precisely. We must not lose sight of these things no matter what.

Fierce love is what characterizes anarchy for me and my approach to intimacy is the same. Anarchist intimacy is holding space around my loved ones to be fucked up messy pieces of shit because of their fucked up messy life and tell them it's okay and I love them. Anarchist intimacy is a loving kick in the arse. It's breaking free of the cold unfeeling structures of civ/capitalism/whatever to exist in a fundamentally intimate way with the world (I am in an erotic relationship with the land I am on and the microplastics in my blood). It's a willingness to get heated and angry and embrace grief and guilt and shame. It's the joy of reconnecting with the mess of human experience and the dogged fucking determination to do that with other people.

So I thought this kinda started well and you were really going somewhere but then you went into these weird Earth-fucking fantasies so I think I'll be loitering the McDonald's a bit longer.

Your mega-woke identitarian overdose has me more confused and concerned than other socially-induced syndromes. *Sigh*. There are ways to rise above your condition of confinement. Goodluck!

My intimacy is anarchic because it is amoral and unconditional!

Only anarchists could take something like love and moralize and idealize and politicize it until it's beyond recognition.

Only Lettuce would. He literally did here.

“We can live without passion or dreams—that is the great liberty this society offers us.”

I can safely bet that citizens of any other totalitarian system will say the same of their own society.

You're never really expected to dream or have passions. You're just expected to be a functional -and productive- member of society. What are your passions or dreams is pointless to the managers, unless when they're lucrative to manipulate and exploit (as the good ol' boys in marketing do on a daily basis).

Speak for yourself. I have plenty of intimacy and love in my life. Yes there is an intimacy of doing crimes with a lover but its not the only form of intimacy. Sex is not intimacy per say and to conflate them is simply false. In this cold oppressive world sincere deep love and intimacy is a radical act. Set fire to the existent with a love in your heart. Bask in the intimacy of love with comrades and lovers when you are home safely after the joy of direct action.

per se.
Borrowed from Latin per sē (“by itself”), from per (“by, through”) and sē (“itself, himself, herself, themselves”).

When does that even happen?

talking about love for my kind of anarchists is similar to talking about anything that is seens as a cultural norm. love as the ultimate good in this extremely alienated culture, supposed to be the refuge from all the ills.

so talking about how great love (or intimacy) is, seems like talking about how great direct democracy is, at least as far as being understood by normies/outsiders. too many people (sometimes True Believers) use it as marketing.

obviously that doesn't mean that the feelings/needs aren't real, but it does make it harder to talk about in some new direction, to not sound like the milsteens of the world.

Honestly I prefer being harsh, rude, insulting and hateful (but with a smile of joy) with all the normies around during their golden moments of intimacy and LOVE. It really raises my morals better than alcohol or drugs and it's free. Also not much effort needed! What better way to violate any couple of lovers' intimacy than starting to hug and give them unwanted affection? That challenges all their pretense at the sanctity of their intimacy and is way, way better and more offensive as the cheaper fart joke.

COMPASSION is the trick!

"so talking about how great love (or intimacy) is, seems like talking about how great direct democracy is, at least as far as being understood by normies/outsiders. too many people (sometimes True Believers) use it as marketing."
I dunno brah, love, when it becomes conditional, has lost its spontaneity. It has been reified and become another commodity, losing its quintessential revolutionary symbolism and praxis.

anarchist intimacy glows bright with intensity of a thousand screens across twitter threads, meme group chats, and online bookclubs, DMs…

anonymity online is the mask that makes them bold enough to share their affinity, but withholding personal identifying information makes their connection somewhat impersonal

the anonymity of a a crowd and black bloc attire allows them to share a moment of anarchy while staying apart and remaining strangers

the form and content of what is being shared, anarchy in words and deeds, takes precedent over the person that shares it, their silences and their omissions

in these forms it’s limited and superficial, like the intimacy of a fandom or any other interest group. in other forms, it resembles what ordinary people who are not anarchists also call intimacy

forgot to mention correspondence with imprisoned anarchists

A nude bloc would have prolly helped solving the problem of impersonalization due to the intensely paranoid culture of black blocs... and made all the cops and citizens feel like the normiecucks they are after all! Also the black blocs I've known were predominantly Maoists. We would have needed bolder ventures into the realm of the unknown in order to countervene the usual cleavages of society. We attempted that at protests a decade back... this had varying effects but the activist pattern of "walking in protest" somewhat undermined these efforts.

'member big demonstrations? So let's say the activist routines (including the black bloc type) got something militaristic and depersonalizing that only maintains divides and isolation.

nudity doesn’t help with anything, but yes, mass events are the opposite of intimate. activists are cogs and organizers are impersonal bureaucrats

You anticapitalization defender of the militant status quo... when you gonna shut up and THINK of these "weird" suggestions you'll start growing a few healthy brain cells (first time in a few decades!) and anarchy might start venturing to new, better realms of social appeal and subversion!

But 'til then... more ASSemblies 'til you become senior citizens who're the only people showing their asses on wild beaches these days. :-(

"Also the black blocs I've known were predominantly Maoists."

Tell us you've never participated in a black bloc without telling us you've never participated in a black bloc.

everything looks like "maoism" to somebody who only knows how to show up, day of and spray snarky, hot takes everywhere

it is great truth!!! Intimacy is a fan fiction. Your body is mine; there is no such thing as personal bubble. No bodily autonomy. These all all WOKE anarchist lies set up so that we can no longer grab them by the pussies n butts. This all belongs to me.

this comment was clearly showing appreciation for jerking off while writing romantic smut. what the fuck are you on about? am i supposed to read this as sarcastic with no '/s'? you make the comments section a worse place for all

Intimacy is one of the commonest and most cohesive techniques used by Homo Sapiens to build bonds between the members of their numerous herds which overpopulate Earth, but ironically it is this very condition of overcrowding which also unfortunately creates toxic and hateful reactions. Is it a case of familiarity breeding contempt, or the scarcity of food and resources within competing herds which causes these wars between intimate members of the same species? We can only ponder upon the complexities of life that cognitive species with free will experience when put together in herds with an hierarchical authoritarian system of rule.

Crime is far more exciting than being in a constant state of unconditional love. I have no feelings. Crimes gives me pleasure (so lots of feelings).

"I got no emotions for anybody else
You better understand
I'm in love with myself, myself
My beautiful self

I've no feeling, no feeling, no feeling
For anybody else"

Crime is a spook of modern states and their godless moralism. It needs the Law and civil order to be of interest to the self-interested. This is yet another binary where one cannot exist without its moral negative, and vice versa.

Also crime is not anarchy, even tho anarchy can in some cases equate to doing crime.

Well described analysis of crime within a binary moral order!

What the fuck is a spook?

We are well aware that lots of things exist at once. But thank you for reminding us. It's true that most involved in direct action are attracted to the intensity, danger, and crime. It's definitely more romantic than camping near a zine still with people that forgot how to enjoy anything.

It's a false and fake myth, an object of worship, a fantasy of immense deception rather than of a true perception and interpretation of reality. For instance, if nude, you are not bullet-proof, you will not go to heaven, god is a spook.

"us" is a spook... There's always just you. Saying 'us' to refer to yourself is like claiming a kind of property over other, same as in conservative marriages. Just coz you're in good relations with some people doesn't mean you're tied to them by life and death.

Add new comment