Anarchists will drop anti-Google anti-capital campaign for $3bn

AN ANARCHIST GROUP has offered internet giant Google a deal, give us $3bn and we will leave you alone.

A group calling itself Counterforce has upped its anti-Google tirades recently and this weekend it positioned itself outside of the home of Kevin Rose, a partner at venture capital outfit Google Ventures.

A blog called Kevin Rose is a Terrible Person paints a picture of the problem that the group has with the man, the money and the machine.

It draws him as something of a poster boy for a poisoned Silicon Valley and describes him in nothing but damning terms.

No Rose stone is left unturned and his personality and career are poured over. He is, says that group, at the head of a bunch of drunk baby men who are destroying society for their own ends.

"Kevin Rose and other venture capitalists like him literally design and implement this entire exploitive system. They do it because they are drunk on their own power, caught up in a sense of importance bestowed upon them by the type of wealth most of us will never interact with. Kevin Rose will rise and fall with the elites of the dominant order," the group said.

"While we struggle to be included in the trickle-down of wealth through dehumanising menial labour, these techies, entrepreneurs, and capitalists take over the world. Knowing that at the vanguard of this tech invasion are people like Kevin Rose only increases our desire to completely stop the current insanity."

Rose and many others are serial investors, but Counterforce has selected him as a symbol and a key player in the dehumanisation of society. It added that he makes a fitting and apt figurehead.

"Tech is now about creating and selling the new indispensable commodity that everyone must have in order to be less bored, less lost, less ridden with anxiety. We want no part of this disgusting and creepy game being played by a bunch power deranged man-children," it added.

This unrest has lead to action, and the group said that unless Google kicks $3bn to an anarchist outfit of its choosing, it will find itself in trouble.

"This money will then be used to create autonomous, anti-capitalist, and anti-racist communities throughout the Bay Area and Northern California. In these communities, whether in San Francisco or in the woods, no one will ever have to pay rent and housing will be free," it claimed.

"With this three billion from Google, we will solve the housing crisis in the Bay Area and prove to the world that an anarchist world is not only possible but in fact irrepressible. If given the chance, most humans will pursue a course towards increased freedom and greater liberty. As it stands, only people like Kevin Rose are given the opportunity to reshape their world, and look at what they do with those opportunities."

The group has made its offer carefully, and it said that Google is in a good position. It can either spare itself from the "revolution" that it threatens, or it can prove that anarchist communities do not work in practice.

Kevin Rose accepted the doorstep protest and revealed on Twitter that he shares some of the concerns of his new neighbours.

"I did agree [with] them that we need to solve rising rents, keep the [San Francisco] culture, and crack down on landlords booting folks out," he said. µ



It'll work right

Except it's liberal.

I TOTALLY agree! Almost everything anarchists do is, after all. I am sure, as indicated by your comment, that you (like me) are very different and are not liberals like most anarchists.

everything is liberal

And what if Google agrees to contribute a few billions to welfare programs in the Bay... which is completely possible!? That would definitely make YOU heroes of liberal reformism, no?

could also describe the militant liberalism of anarchists continually seeking new bogeymen

"If given the chance, most humans will pursue a course towards increased freedom and greater liberty." - spoken like a true capitalist

"This money will then be used to create autonomous, anti-capitalist, and anti-racist communities throughout the Bay Area and Northern California. In these communities, whether in San Francisco or in the woods, no one will ever have to pay rent and housing will be free,"

You better check your privilage if you want to stay, though.

And it shall be administered by white suburban twentysomthings who like to buy their outfits at Spencers and pretend to be revolutionaries until such time they got work for large tech companies and receive excessive pay and stock options which they use to separate themselves from society, send their spawn to private schools, employ immigrants to raise their spawn, and drive Audi's

"Parasite" "baby man"

oh great left-wing fascism

just what I needed

and alpha- feminism

p.s I really hope they get the money. I've always wanted the live in an anarchist prison.

"autonomous, anti-capitalist, anti-racist" - anarchism is not even on the agenda. straight-up animal farm

ur rite. One sector of the anarchist/activist milieu, the faction that has always been quasi-maoist, is now actually just straight up embracing that fact. the slow slippage is complete. "automanous anti-racism" has always been how Maoism described itself.

you see the same with another sector in the anarchist/activist scene, the peeps that like dauve and cammatte and fredy perlmen, the quasi-ultra-leftists, are now just straight up calling themselves communists and ultra-leftists. (of course communist has been used by the tiqquinists for some time... I think it will grow even stronger)

I predict the terms ultra-leftist, autonomous, and communist will proliferate in multiple, sometimes conflictual ways, but generally with some larger, macro level split between "Autonomous" (anti-racists, feminists, decolonizers, whatever
) and ultra-leftists/communists/nihilist communists and anarchist, as a term, will fall by the wayside. Of course there will be those who are on border between ultra-leftist and autonomous, the space typically held by insurrectionists (who sometimes brought in a third, heterogeneous element of egoism and certain ring wing ideas{ i do not use this word pejoratively, necccasily}), but this position will become more untenable; anarchist will cease to be a word that can represent a meeting point or hold the two tendencies together...

Are post WW2/1 products, in my view we are heading for a period where the older individualist anarchist stuff might come up the middle. The neo-1911 period that P l Wilson talks about. I think the internet is heading for a definitive 1789 level expression with things like crypto currency also playing a role.

uhhhhhhhhhh, maybe on the coasts where there a bunch of yall, and you dont like being small fish in a big pond and have to find ways to feel 'especial' from each other. where im from theres nothing like that going on.

The thing is when you look at intellectual trends emanating from the millennial born generation it is tending away from some of those core 1968 ideas. I think the coming epoch could be advantageous for a more spiritually individualistic period if all cards are played right. Stirner is making a comeback again and as Bob Black said anarchism is the only radical game in town right now. Eventually those 2 tendencies that you speak of eventually either stagnate, or return to their Marxist based orthodox origins in the case of the whole euro ultra left thing, in the case of the activist types, they eventually become formal politicians or get a university gig.

Though I'm flattered I'm sure by your advances, you must know that my . . . uh . . . preferences lie elsewhere. Unless you are prepared to dress up like one of the pigs from "Three Little Piggies." Then and only then I might oblige you.

-- Bob Black (pig ffffucker and dance instructor at the Luening-Ussachevsky Institute for Spastics)


Jon Bekken? No. Maybe Jim Hogshire? Much more likely, don't you think?

-- Bob Black (pig ffffucker and registered dental receptionist)

Let's see if extortion works....

The Gnat says, "I'll stop buzzing around and being annoying and shit if you turn me into a bird."
To which the Elephant says nothing. Its tail does all the talking: WHOMP! squashing the Gnat like a, well -- like it was a gnat.

nose tweaking is great fun, both for the perp(s) and their audience.
i stand in solidarity with that kind of tweak.

how many more "hooded figures" would it take to tip a full size entitlementmobile?

what's with all you fools so afraid of Maoism? It's just the new insult ya'll like to throw at people who don't fit into your narrative. "OH MY GOD HE'S NOT AN ABSTRACT POST LEFTIST, INSURRECTIONIST WHO WANTS TO DISCUSS THEORY! HE SAID ANTI-RACIST AND AUTONOMOUS. MAOIST!". LOL fuckin pathetic. I'm far from a Maoist though, but I would have no problem utilizing a Maoist organization if I saw they had some effective aspects in confronting capital. Remember, diversity of tactics means more than 'you can do what you want' it means that opposites using their strong points to link up is effective. Basically, anti-capitalism isn't a force strong enough to sit around and discuss how to specifically achieve a perfect post-capitalist society with any relevancy. Right now the discussion should not be about "who's image and path of post-capitalism" is wrong, but "how do we use each view, and approach to anti-capitalism in a way in which they all mutual support one another for the time being,draw in larger numbers, and advance the struggle".

At this point, it is the duty of the resistance to dismantle the machine. Creating a 'perfect world' or elsewise finding solutions for how to run the world in post-capitalism is NOT OUR RESPONISBILITY. we are few, and our resources are even fewer. if we waste time conjecturing over how to run utopia, we will never get out from under the heel of dystopia.

Have fun denouncing one another, and embracing a diversity of tactics when it fits your own will, but not living by it when embracing people with differences becomes 'too hard' for you to handle. All while the system remains oppressive, and the fascists globally remain way more united than us, drawing large crowds of dissociated peoples while the left was too busy discussing who has a better vision on how to reach the perfect post-capitalist world.

I consider myself an Anarchist, but guess what, I've made friends with Maoists,etc. and they have provided me and friends with resources that have only bettered the projects we were working on. agreeing to disagree, and love-hate is always better than just disagreeing and hating.

how do we use each view, and approach to anti-capitalism in a way in which they all mutual support one another for the time being,draw in larger numbers, and advance the struggle".

here's what you don't get. post-leftism isn't "anti-capitalist"

Sounds good. Skip to the 3 rd chapter though. You know, when the authoritarians shoot all the anarchists and bury them in a mass grave for not following "the party line that advances the revolution"

get fucked maoist

Unfortunately, history has shown that these short sighted appeals to form common fronts against capitalism usually end up with anarchists being thrown in jail or executed by Maoists and other authoritarian leftists once the tide begins to turn. Maoism is an authoritarian cult, and a ridiculous one at that. This has nothing to do with a diversity of tactics, it's about long term strategy and principle. We're not fighting for the same things, even if we do share some common enemies. Appeals for anarchists to put a lid on their politics for the common good are made by manipulative leftists who want to make sure that opposition to authoritarian models are kept silent. If you really think that embracing Maoist cults are going to draw in larger numbers, then you're delusional. Mao is popularly known as a murderous dictator who promoted a cult of personality, which hasn't proved to be liberatory in the least.

This is why I sometimes distance myself from anarchism. When left anti capitalist authoritarianism is used as the foil that hides capitalist fascist effective authority. These "anarchists" that talk this way are either ignorant or committed to losing. Even syndicalists accept the necessity for some form or relative nature of authority. Usually it's fash and capitalist authority that demands the most demoralizing sacrifices to "the common good" usually couched in this same rhetoric.

Lol at 'even syndicalists.' Goddamn, I really wish that apologists for authoritarianists really would distance themselves from anarchism since it is fundamentally opposed to authority, but they just can't help themselves, probably realizing that naked authoritarianism is about as popular as soggy bread. Just own up to your politics for fucks sake and quit pretending to be the sympathetic but more serious alternative to anarchism. If a genuinely anarchist movement is to emerge, it is going to be dependent upon distancing itself from these authoritarian leftists dressed in anarchist clothing.

I take offence to the picture which is not a valid interaction in the standard model. Bah! Bah! I say.

Re: "the peeps that like dauve and cammatte and fredy perlmen (sic), the quasi-ultra-leftists, are now just straight up calling themselves communists and ultra-leftists" -- I hope the ones that like FREDY PERLMAN (kinda funny somebody messed up the last name spelling but got the first right!) will also eventually come around to green anarchism like he ultimately did. Especially since there actually is no hope of anarchy existing inside civilization.

Re: "Have fun denouncing one another, and embracing a diversity of tactics when it fits your own will, but not living by it when embracing people with differences becomes 'too hard' for you to handle." A diversity of tactics is not the same as a diversity of end goals. Your enemy's enemy is not in all places and times your friend. Anarchists and Maoists may be against some of the same things but aren't generally for the same things -- like anarchists and (right) libertarians.

right libertarians think everything is about and can be solved through economics

Back to Fredy Perlman. In "The Continuing Appeal of Nationalism" he described Maoist national liberation politics as being, like Soviet communism, a type of extreme left wing nationalism no less despicable, and only a bit different from, the extreme right wing nationalism of the German Nazis or Italian fascists. Both left and right wing nationalism want to control state power to empower one ethnic or cultural group.

Right wing nationalism tends to be about maintaining the status quo or expanding a dominant group's power, or perhaps about restoring past glory. Both Italian Fascists and German Nazis wanted to create their own new Roman empire of sorts -- the Italians' was based on the real Rome, the Germans' on a mythical narrative of a Germany that could have won World War I if it wasn't stabbed in the back by a minority of supposedly rich and powerful Jewish capitalists, but which would rise again and clear all of Europe of the ethnic groups it saw as inferior.

Much post-WWII left wing nationalism was Maoist national liberation front struggles that were connected with the end of imperialism -- "decolonization" if you like. So in some cases there was an aspect of retaining lost glory from past indigenous empires and state apparatuses, but in many cases people were building something new to overturn either a colonial imported elite or the indigenous ruling class they'd left as their heirs. Socioeconomic class, and not ethnic or cultural identity alone, is also often enmeshed with left wing nationalism.

Both left and right wing nationalism seek state power, usually authoritarian or totalitarian state power, and their ideology involves the glorification of one ethnic or cultural group. People outside that group tend to be seen as lesser beings for one reason or another, and people inside that group must join or they are viewed as traitors.

Interestingly, the Ukrainian nationalists are perhaps somewhere in between left and right wing nationalism. They are like left wing nationalists anyway, in the fact that they fight for the glorious mythical future of something that never really existed -- an independent modern Ukrainian state that is not just the pawn of an empire based in Russia. Perhaps then, Svoboda can be said to be part of a wave of global decolonization struggles.

To simplify: historically, right wing nationalism, including fascism and Nazism, is more of an ideology for majority, enfranchised ruling ethnic groups, esp. in major European (or European diaspora powers). Left wing nationalism, including Maoism and national liberation fronts, has been more of an ideology for minority, disenfranchised ruling ethnic groups, or for ethnic groups that are the majority but live in an area that is or was recently controlled by outside imperialist/colonialist structures. But that's historical -- it's possible in the future these old categories will become a mix and match box. In fact they already are -- how else would you have right wing Tea Party types putting out an ideology that middle class white males have become the oppressed and disenfranchised, who are being exploited and attacked by people of color and women (or at least feminist women)? It's a bit like the old Nazi stabbed in the back myth, but its also run with and turned on its head the victim politics of the last 4 decades. It's wild, crazy shit, truly.

Look who just came back drunk from a twitter storify....

i'd just take the $3bn and buy an island, who gives a fuck about the cost of houses in oakland when you're ballin that hard

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.
1 + 15 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.
Subscribe to Comments for "Anarchists will drop anti-Google anti-capital campaign for $3bn"