Queering Snitches, Landlords, and Bosses? Why Anarchists Spaces Must Not Host "Queering Anarchism"

Dear Friendly Anarchist Social Centers, Infoshops, and Book Stores,

We are writing to inform you about concerns we have with the book Queering Anarchism, recently published by AK Press. This is not a critique of the politics within Queering Anarchism, albeit we have many, rather it is to offer you vital information on some of the contributing authors. We believe this information to be damning and contrary to anarchy, anarchism, and revolutionary movements alike.

Dr. Anthony J Nocella, II is a professor, self-described “scholar activist” and known state collaborator. In 2006, Anthony gladly accepted an invitation extended by the FBI to educate their classes at Quantico on how they could better police revolutionary movements using “conflict-resolution.” Anarchists as well as earth and animal liberation activists widely condemned Nocella's cooperation. In his own words:

“Perhaps frustrated by their inability to catch any significant number of underground activists, the FBI recently began contacting academics and high-profile activists to invite them to speak at their academy. Under the guise of dialogue, clearly their intention was somehow to glean information to use against the underground movement. I was told I had been invited not because of the ALF, but to quote the instructor, because of my …studies in the areas of peacemaking and conflict resolution. Before deciding to accept their speaking invitation, I consulted the views of about 30 people — former political prisoners, anti-imperialists, professors, animal liberationists, Earth liberationists, and friends. After much discussion and debate I decided, with the agreement of others, that I would go…

I would speak solely on conflict resolution (specifically restorative justice which I studied for my MA at Fresno Pacific University), which I am more than willing to do and have done for military officers, ROTCs, public safety, law enforcement, and NGOs throughout the Americas.[i] I also said I would explain why there is no satisfactory definition of terrorism. I accepted the FBIs invitation to speak at their academy, along with their $800.00 payment, and donated it to grassroots groups and political prisoners…

I hold to the belief that dialogue (speaking truth to power) is the way to peace, not ideological positioning. Further, we must be critical of ourselves as well as others in the form of dialogue. This belief comes from my Quaker religion and Freirian philosophy. Of course  we should not speak when they come knocking or at a grand jury, but the situation is different when we confront the opposition in open debates, classrooms, and conferences. Most important, whereas they thought they could play me for information, I came to learn something about how the FBI thinks and operates. As many long-time anti-imperialists and Black liberationists have told me, the old way was not working, and we need to gather information on them as well.  Note also that this was a class sponsored by University of Virginia, so there were no transcripts, as is common in any university class, but again the class I taught was no different than any class I have taught or assisted for at Syracuse University….

While I do not advise others to attend the FBI Academy or work with the FBI at all, I do believe it was beneficial in the sense that I provided conflict resolution and explained that kicking in doors at gun point and using other forms of repression are not the answer to ending illegal actions activists often take, but rather an escalation of conflict and a cause of more extreme

We reject the notion that Nocella's donation of a mere $800.00 to radical projects and political prisoners justifies his actions. Nocella goes on to use his religious beliefs as a half-assed excuse for turning his back on resistance movements. To be clear, any religion which accepts cooperation with state power or any oppressive institution is the enemy. Anthony's assertion that his treachery should be accepted because he gained valuable information on the inner workings of the FBI by lecturing at Quantico is laughable.

Dr. Anthony J. Nocella, II is the co-author of Queer-Cripping Anarchism: Intersections and Reflections on Anarchism, Queerness,
and Dis-ability

Ryan Conrad is a phd candidate, a self-described product of the safe, white middle class, and a landlord. Upon his graduation from Bates University, Ryan purchased a house to be used as a “queer collective” on his parents' dime. Conrad's super nice gesture to create a house for queer youth, named the Bangarang Collective, was soon replaced by his desire for authority. The author's of this piece know of at least one trans person to publicly acknowledge that they were evicted from Conrad's house after they were unable to pay rent to Ryan Conrad in a timely fashion.

In the spring of 2012 individuals on tumblr and elsewhere on the internet created satirical memes critiquing the actions and positions of Ryan Conrad. Rather than brush the inevitable satire a public figure faces aside, Ryan and his photographer claimed to own the rights of the images used in the memes and threatened legal action against those who reblogged the memes should Tumblr not remove the meme posts.

We could go on for hours about Ryan's manipulative behavior or his attempts at creating a career out of the struggles of poor, gender variant, and queer people but we think his being a queer “anarchist” landlord is enough to discredit him.

If you would like to know more about Ryan Conrad's self-serving contributions to the “queering” of “anarchism” take a look at his personal website: www.faggotz.org

Ryan Conrad authored “(Gay) Marriage and (Queer) Love” in Queering Anarchism

Jerimarie Liesegang is the Director of TransAdvocacy Coalition, lobbyist, and former owner of a software company and boss of twelve programers. Actually we aren't going to say anything else about Liesegang we will just let her speak for herself.

“Founder of the Connecticut TransAdvocacy Coalition (CATC) whose mission is to improve, through education, political and social advocacy and activism, societal attitudes and the law in order to achieve equal rights for the Trans and gender non-conforming individuals and communities. CTAC is a true grassroots and coalition oriented organization comprising individuals and organizations dedicated to the advancement and attainment of full Human Rights for all trans and gender non-conforming people in every aspect of society and actively opposes discriminatory acts.”
Brief autobiographical blurb from http://cira.yale.edu/people/jerimarie-liesegang-phd

“...I had a thriving business in Ct that employed up to 12 technical programmers and sadly when I transitioned I lost all my contracts due to discrimination and had to shutter my businness. Though I searched for a new job, it took me over three years to find an employer who would look beyond my being a transsexual and realize that I could be of value to them...I will also say that there is light in all of this misery. The company that finally did hire me realized the value that a trans person can be to a Corporation and two years ago modified their EEO policies to include Gender Identity”
Transcript of her testimony before the Connecticut State Legislature's Judiciary Committee

Jerimarie Liesegang authored “Tyranny of the State and Trans Liberation” in Queering Anarchism.

Some Other Academic Contributors to Queering Anarchism:

Dr. Jami Heckert, PhD, consultant at The Open University; University of Essex; Research Assistant at University of Essex
Dr. Martha A. Ackelsberg, PhD, Chair of the William R. Kenan, Jr., Professor of Government Program for the Study of Women and Gender at Smith College
Dr. Benjamin Shepard, PhD, is an Associate Professor of Human Service at New York School of Technology/City University of New York.
Dr. Farhang Rouhani, PhD.; Associate Professor at University of Mary Washington
Dr. Benjamin Shepard, PhD, is an Assistant Professor of Human Service at New York School of Technology/City University of New York
Dr. Sandra Jeppesen, PhD, Assistant Professor at Lakehead University; Assistant Professor at Concordia University
Jason Lydon; Reverend with the Unitarian Universalist Church
Dr. Liat Ben-Moshe; PhD Postdoctoral fellow at the department of Disability and Human
Development at the University of Illinois at Chicago

We do not mean to imply that any of the individuals listed above are evil nor do we advocate threats against their safety. We admit many of the academics or reverends listed are probably very nice people who enjoy their work. However, does a book comprised almost entirely of works by professors and aspiring academics accurately represent queer anarchism? Do any of these academics know what it is like to have to fight to survive? Do they have any real experience participating in queer anarchist struggle? Have they done anything other than turn our stories into self-serving theories to be sold to university for a fat pay check or to bolster their CVs? What makes these individuals so qualified to write an entire book on the “queering” of “anarchism?” What gives these people more legitimacy on the subject of “queering anarchism” than those of us who have lived on the streets, sucked dick in alley ways, and fought bashers, pigs, and johns? Should we allow bosses, landlords, professors, academics, and snitches to be the voice of queer anarchism?

We are not liberals. We do not have heart strings to be pulled by an academic who snitches in the name of religious freedom. Furthermore, justifying collaboration by donating your money to prisoners is a disgusting ploy and slap in the face to anyone who has ever done time. Offering up advice or education on “conflict resolution” to a university whose sole purpose is to train FBI agents puts revolutionaries at risk of injury, imprisonment, and death. We do not feel bad for power hungry, “middle class,”white children who purchase a house with their rich family's money and then evict a poor transperson who cannot pay rent. We have no sympathy for landlords. We will not cry for a boss who looses their fortune after coming out as trans, only to find their worth again in Corporate America. Not only do we refuse empathy for these individuals but as poor queer anarchists we view them as our class enemies.

Anarchists do not hope for a better policing apparatus. We want to destroy policing. Anarchists do not want dialogue with the most sophisticated and violent counter insurgency agency in the history of the world. Our aim is insurrection. Anarchists do not seek legitimacy in academia. Our goal is to destroy the university. Anarchists are not landlords who throw people out on the streets. We want landlords dead and property destroyed. Anarchists are not bosses. We organize to destroy work itself.

As it stands, queers and fellow anarchists should view Queering Anarchism for what it is, recuperation of our struggle. In the last five years queer anarchists have taken our struggles to the streets with a militancy not seen in decades. Queer anarchists have built barricades, rioted, created safety nets, made camps, started houses, and opened squats social centers. The consequences have been real; house raids, incarceration, and grand juries. We will not silently allow our struggle, desires and pain to be recuperated into the academy or co-opted by the state.

The Queering Anarchism editorial collective must publicly condemn the actions of Anthony J. Nocella, II a known collaborator with the state. They must condemn the Capitalist, cissupremacist, landlord Ryan Conrad. They should offer up an explanation as to why they have included an article titled Tyranny of the State and Trans Liberation written by a lobbyist, boss, and assimilationist Jerimarie Liesegang. Until they do so their projects should not be welcome in anarchist spaces.

We ask that the Wildcat Social Center in Seattle, MonkeyWrench Books in Austin, Bluestockings Books in Manhattan, the Bay Area Anarchist Bookfair, and all other anarchist spaces who are set to host Queering Anarchism rescind their invitations.

Some Insurrectionary Queer Anarchists



How about starting critical conversations at the event(s), instead of trying ban those you disagree with?

'critical conversations'.. just like the ones that the contributor had with the FBI.

no dialogue with state collaborators!

it's not censorship to encourage people not to host this person or buy their book.

censorship would be making those things ILLEGAL.

you're pretty fucking dumb, even for a liberal.

Civilized, critical conversations with State collaborators or fascists (same) is putting anarchists into a logic of collaboration, submission, and legalism. People like you are the problem with this movement. Under the guise of some twisted idea of tolerance or rationality you allow the most reactionary forces to fuck up our milieu in sheep disguise.

The only thing real anarchists can do in today's university faculties is SMASH AND BURN! FUck institutions of the State, fuck collaborators, and above all FUCK LANDLORDS. They are the biggest authoritarian capitalists in our everyday lives.




he did teach a class at the fbi academy to the cadets. he only talked about it publicly once the fbi outed him while trying to recruit other people. for years tony was known in texas as an abusive, manipulative, whiny little entitled shithead, whos only involvement with anarchists was to speak for us. he would even post on indymedia in texas as abc groups and other anarchist groups he was not it.

"for years tony was known in texas as an abusive, manipulative, whiny little entitled shithead"

Quit saying shit like this in anonymous comments.

i could write a name that nobody knows but who cares. its true, it was common knowledge and the reason he never does anything in texas for the last decade.

Texas is a pretty fuckin' big place, and as someone who has lived there for the past decade, I have never heard any of this.

seems like a lot of rhetoric. A lot of turning greys into very binary black and whites.
Still, there may be a few points in here, if you can read through all the blanket statements and guilt by associations

rhetoric? no seems like facts. the man admits to helping the FBI shape a 'soft policing' strategy to more effectively stop violent action.
Landlords, FBI lecturers, Bosses.... seems pretty straightforward to me.

Leah: "I just told them what nice people you all were!"

yeah lecturing to the fbi academy, evicting trans people, and being a boss are TOTALLY grey areas. academics profiting off of queer struggle...TOTALLY a grey area

the last one is kind of a grey area

landlord? this is fucking stupid. a landlord is someone who makes money off their ownership of a space.

lots of people kick housemates out for not paying rent. are these people landlords? if i sublet a place and the person refuses to pay, am I a landlord?

no you're not a landlord if you sublet, duh, you're a landlord if you own the building and rent it out

hey remember when sandra went to jail for stalking her ex boyfreind and throwing a brick through his window, remember when ariana was a prostitute, remember when lara was a junkie who abandoned her kids, remember when philip thought the fbi and cia was surveilling *him*, remember when gabe was an alcoholic who accused his wife of battery and ruined her poetic reputation, remember when joe smoked pot and punched out a retarded kid and went to jail, remember when jon went to jail for battery...should we go on, and this is all true, and more. You people really need to get your own fucking lives. You are utterly repulsive.

"remember when joe smoked pot and punched out a retarded kid and went to jail, remember when jon went to jail for battery..."

Nope those last two slipped my memory. Please elaborate.

so if i rent a place from a landlord, and i then sublet it to someone else, and they don't pay the rent, and i kick them out for non-payment... how exactly is my behavior different from that of a landlord?

note, i said my behavior, not some capitalist identity box/role. from the perspective of the person i am subletting to, i am a landlord. if i kick them out for non-payment, i am behaving identically to a landlord, from any rational perspective.

sometimes it is really hard to think outside the boxes people create for themselves and others, eh?

Thank you for writing this...I was not familiar with much of the stories and recently just heard about the book.

I didn't really read after the first person they talk about, but I don't get what's wrong with what he did? I'm sure we'd all like a chance to tell the FBI to stop raiding our homes, and this guy got $800 to do it, which he gave to local causes. Yeah, don't talk to cops/feds, but this guy didn't (to our knowledge) divulge info, he just said, it'd be more productive to go about things differently.

It is, in fact, more productive for the state to use "soft-hand" methods. You should read the piece "Cop-Out" about Aufhebengate by the Greek group TPTG for more info on that.

But we don't want the state to be more productive. We want it to stop existing.
When cops/feds use "more productive" methods, that means that society identifies more with them then with those of us actively resisting pacification.

I hate to be super brutal but you're a fucking counter-revolutionary liberal if you think that we should be giving the FBI tips to integrate them further into the collective ideal of "acceptable forms of governance." Needless to say, that terrain was created by them in the first place. Let them use their own fucking specialists and make them do the work of data-crunching on their own.

I second this. Nocella really does sound like a reformist liberal playing at being anarchist and the excuses he gives for his paid consulting work to the FBI don't hold water at all. There's no difference between what Nocella did and what Clifford Stott does.

However, it is a little unfair to mix up all the legitimate issues many folks have with Nocella with a broad stroke dismissal of all the other folks involved in the production of the book or who have pieces published therein. Whether or not it's biased towards academia is a separate issue.

It's not more productive for the state to use soft methods. It's more socially acceptable, the results are not the same. If what you say is true, then the state would always use such methods. But they don't, a fact which you can only explain as irrational...

Going hard works for the state; it just has blowback.

Don't be an idiot.

I think it depends, I'd say that the 'reforms' to the penal system in the past couple centuries made it "softer" in certain ways but also much more effective. sometimes the state hasn't actually figured out the most effective thing to do yet.

so in other words, he should of told the fbi to kick the shit out of people and raid more homes, so people will overthrow the state? lol This site is already getting old. Every comment is 'this guy isn't an anarchist, that gal isn't an anarchist' based on petty life decisions that are inevitable. so what, some people aren't 15 typing in their parents basement or living in some dumpster. kinda ironic that I consider some of my friends anarchist and they would never identify with it, yet everybody else finds any reason to call someone else out as not being anarchist even if they identify with it (I'm not talking about the author of this book, just in general) I would love to go lecture in front of the fbi. I'd probably be nonstop cursing, but I would never pass up that offer.

I also heard that the ironically-named "rogue" moderated a website and banned people who disagreed with her, and is generally a bitch.

fuck this book. fuck this jargon filled nonsense critique. at least one of the authors I know personally and he has had to suck dick/fight gay bashings etc etc.

who cares? book is still garbage. critique is garbage. statements of origin aren't critiques. A landlord is cis-supremacist for evicting a non-paying tenant? Do you even hear yourself? A landlord that evicts a black person is racist too, right? A landlord that evicts a white person is classist? Our objection to landlords can't go deeper than this? Why bring up this shallow bullshit? It's infantile. This is one of the millions of reasons no one takes us seriously.

yes, we actually are simply against landlords. fuck them. they are not our comrades.

Jargon filled critique?
People get more and more illiterate on this site by the day.

"Jargon is terminology which is especially defined in relationship to a specific activity, profession, group, or event"

Cis-supremacist. I'm sure everyone understands what this means. Phew.

if people in whatever anarchist space you inhabit are still unclear about what "cis" means, then you have a serious fucking problem. this critique was readable as hell, and like anything else, if there's a word that someone doesn't understand they are welcome to look it up. it's not like this whole write up is an extended reference to hegalian nonsense that would take years to understand.

"jargon" doesn't mean that the word is not understood. It's a vocabulary word that's specific to a certain area of interest- something that most people are unfamiliar with. It seems to me that calling someone a cissupremacist for evicting another is a confusion of the landlords motivation- money. Maybe there was another reason the authors wrote this that they didn't explain? Either way, it seems a bit uncreative to throw accusations (cis supremacist) out there without giving solid references. But then, I've been finding these shorthand terms that describe oppressive attitudes to be very limiting recently, anyway.

"jargon filled nonsense critique"

"Cis-supremacist" is used what, once?

Does "assimilationist" also fall under jargon? (Damn, it's even underlined as a misspelled word.) You're being dumb.

To be clear, I wrote the "...'jargon' doesn't mean that the word is not understood..." comment, and nothing else. Personally, strictly defining what is jargon and what isn't doesn't matter. I'm not being dumb. I'm just writing what I think, and only addressing very specific things. Why people punctuate their messages with swears and insults, I imagine is to sound more militant/tough/take-no-bullshit? I'm a delicate flower, so I'm going to block that out.

"cis" doesn't mean anything and frankly I wish anarchists would stop using it. It just means "not trans", so everyone who doesn't fit the new norm of "trans" is shuttled into this catch-all category that doesn't actually describe anything or enlighten anyone. The intention behind the word is obviously to make trans people the "new normal" and everyone else somehow wrong and guilty. In other words, it's a cheap political slogan and not a scientific analysis of sex.
Anyone who thinks human sexuality and gender norms can be summed in a simplistic binary of "trans" (good) and "cis" (bad, oppressive) really has no grasp of reality.

>the new norm of "trans"

>has no grasp of reality.

Fuck right off. Preferably off a cliff.

...this was a pretty okay troll as far as it goes.

the author also said "Anarchists are not landlords who throw people out on the streets. We want landlords dead and property destroyed."
and there really isn't any jargon in this.

I'm not really in the housing trade, so "landlord" is sort of jargon to me. Someone please explain what is landlord!

I own property and I'm an anarchist, please don't destroy it.

In my experience, it is most always about "the queen" of either/any ostensible gender. Identity (self-identity) takes precedence over all other critiques. It is eternally about the drama. Not the resolution. Find me a queen who wants to burn the stage to the f-king ground and i'll party with you all day and night. But this endless posing and posturing has got to go.

Further, the Americans - of any and all colors, shapes and genders are so immersed in their capitalist fishbowl and the happy go lucky disney life that 1/2 the time they haven't a clue where to start. And,frisco, the throne of the queens is the ab-so-f-king imperialist capital of delusion, posturing and self-congratulations on planet earth. Thanks kids. You are the problem. And you are still 7 million miles from the solution before you take one step out of your Mission/Castro apartment. You guys are so queer that you're straight. Chupe mantequilla de mi culo.


this is a projection by an American :)

I'm going to respond to the piece here that I'm best suited to address. I've worked politically with Jerimarie since 2006. In that time, again and again I've witnessed her unflinching solidarity to all the downtrodden, no matter the consequences. If I've ever heard her say a kind word about a boss or any other oppressor or exploiter, it most certainly doesn't come to mind. What does come to mind are the simply uncountable hours of work she has poured into the struggle. Even more, she is not simply a work horse, she's a militant and one who's willing to butt heads with liberals, authoritarians, and actual, real assimilationists. You call her an assimilationist, and I know therefore that you know nothing about her except what you could google. I know her reasons for having taken part in lobbying the state, because I took the time to listen to her and understand where the transgender movement in CT is at. You have not. I will not take your slander as a license to speak for her and her political choices. You denounce her as a boss, and yet google did not reveal her more recent work history, during which time she became radicalized.

I am not writing any of this for the benefit of some internet warriors, but for those who might have the good fortune to meet her one day. I can't imagine how sad I would be if someone had said something nasty about her before we met, and only after I snubbed her had I realized how wrong I was. I was told good things, and benefited immensely, and so I will pay it forward.

Tip: If you are going to write garbage like this and post it publicly how bout you post your name with it.

It's funny how you accuse people of being snitches/cops or whatever anarcho scene buzzword you can come up with for people who aren't like you but you write 15 paragraphs of cointellpro 101. Fuck off.

Oh cointelpro... that strategy to police social movements developed by the FBI... good thing Anthony Nocella talked to them to give them some other strategies!

dude seriously taught a class at the FBI academy.

I get it. I read that. Did you read the part about the "landlord" kicking a trans person out for "not paying rent for awhile?" Give me a reason why I should have to read that? Why my time wasn't taken into consideration.

You don't see any reason why it is objectionable to have a LANDLORD write for an ANARCHIST anthology about how to be better queer anarchism?

Do you have any idea how many people these days are technically considered landlords that just own one home? The allegation is that they know of "one" person who has been kicked out for not paying rent. Do you have any idea how silly that sounds? It sounds like the author has 0 conception of real life. For instance, I don't own my home but I am the only one on the lease and I have a roommate. If they stopped paying rent "for awhile" should I tell them to gtfo or nah its cool just chill here? We don't even know the circumstances of this statement, it isn't outlined, probably because its totally silly. In fact, the author makes it sound like the owner LIVED in the home, which essentially makes this sound like a roommate situation gone wrong. Definitely not a normal experience in modern world amirite? What if the roommate was not paying rent and being a total mooch asshole? What if this guy owned the home, lived somewhere else and the OTHER roommates in the house were like yo landlord, can you help us get this person not paying rent out? I could probably come up with at least a dozen scenarios that make that part sound totally stupid.

So the answer to your question is NO. Anarchism is a libertarian philosophy that doesn't expect humans to be perfect, but that a free society can be encouraged by imperfect individuals. Bro.

*birds chirping* *wind blowing*

I actually sort of agree with this. It does sound like the person in question was also living in the house. I know that if I owned a house and had a mortgage to pay on it, I would probably ask a non-paying roommate to leave too, or at least work something out. We don't really live in any sort of ideal world where we can all live together and not have to pay rent.

*sigh* not yet.... ~_~

US anarchists need to start getting serious about snitches and turn coats.

"I hold to the belief that dialogue (speaking truth to power) is the way to peace, not ideological positioning."

man, I really hate that phrase ("speaking truth to power")

If this situation existed in any country with a serious anarchist movement, there would be no discussion of grey areas and the like. Nocella's crimes alone would be sufficient enough for every space to cancel the event, at bare minimum. The problem with America is "anarchists" here have very wishy washy politics and constantly apologize to their enemies. Stop feeling bad for your enemies, they are your enemies for a reason, attack them. Furthermore, spend less time trying to defend some landlord academic and some bastard who talks to the FBI and spend more time attacking the state. This is a far more black and white situation than the Leah Plante situation was although that also communicates how weak the politics of so many are who were unwilling to condemn her.

Breakdown of US anarchists:
25% dumb oogles
60% liberals
10% Trotskyists
5% anarchists

More like:
25% paid police informants recruited from the ranks of college kids
5% college professors
5% libertarian communists
5% anarchists
15% Rousseauean "Noble Sauvage" primitivist college kids
15% Vegan Wanna Save The Redwood Trees And Pink Porpoises college kids
10% emotionally disturbed bourgeois and petit bourgeois college kids
20% other assorted bourgeois and petit bourgeois college kids

how come you're so dumb

Did I blow somebody's cover?

"What gives these people more legitimacy on the subject of “queering anarchism” than those of us who have lived on the streets, sucked dick in alley ways, and fought bashers, pigs, and johns? Should we allow bosses, landlords, professors, academics, and snitches to be the voice of queer anarchism?"

1. I don't see how sucking dick in alley ways and living on the streets gives someone more legitimacy than being an academic (the FBI thing is of course a different story).
2. It sounds like you should write a book or something about queer-anarchism so that there is more than these people being a "voice" as you put it.

"While I do not advise others to attend the FBI Academy or work with the FBI at all, I do believe it was beneficial in the sense that I provided conflict resolution and explained that kicking in doors at gun point and using other forms of repression are not the answer to ending illegal actions activists often take, but rather an escalation of conflict and a cause of more extreme
tactics." - Anthony Nocella

This is possibly the single most misguided (or telling) statement I've ever heard an 'anarchist' make. What is his goal - polite oppression?

Teaching a class to the FBI is stupid but it's not snitching. Calling someone a snitch over and over and calling for violence against them is a popular conintelpro tactic though. You're either a bratty child or a cop.

Where in this piece did any one call for violence against the people listed? Also lulz to this:
"Calling someone a snitch over and over and calling for violence against them is a popular conintelpro tactic though. You're either a bratty child or a cop."
Sounds like youre the only one snitch baiting without any proof.

"we want landlords dead" is just one place. i'm the editor of this controversial book, and one of the persons who all of this call-to-violence against me has been issued. I just want to congratulate everyone involved, over the last year, because I do indeed feel unsafe walking down the street, and feel as if a group/ an anarchist saw me walking down the street, that they would feel it was right to rape or murder me. so, good work kids. whether I haven't 'reacted well' to having my work repressed, having an endless stream of vile propaganda written about me, having my life raped and my privacy invaded, and being stalked - is a matter that I'm sure only I will be able to answer truthfully.



selective reading much?
"We do not mean to imply that any of the individuals listed above are evil nor do we advocate threats against their safety"

That's just part of the propaganda.

cool story, bro

Listen, this is going to be my last comment here. I was wrong to try to fight this, obviously I just made it worse. My personal safety is now my greatest concern.

Well, hopefully you won't be showing up to any of these presentations, because you may be having your face smashed.

Okay, I have to make one more comment (even though I'm sure no one is really listening here, and a linda blair/exorcist comment will immediately be following it with ' lowhat'?)...This is the violence we began to try to address/fight in Queering Anarchy and in our forthcoming works, with all of our strength, and the clearest head we could conjure up in the circumstances - which makes it quite sad that now it is this kind of violence that is being used against us to discredit our works, and our character. Quite sad.

For the record, I feel sorry for your situation. Anarchists tend to be very hyper-critical and purist in whatever of the million facets of anarchism they feel strongeset about. You can't say anything without pissing a handfull off, especially not on the subject of anarchy. Apparently trying to further the cause of anarchism is more likely to draw the wrath of anarchists than being a real agent of the state. I say shame on those threatening you and good luck trying to get a humane response out of the anarchistnews commentors. So much for free expression. Quite sad indeed.

I wish this piece had more explicitly separated the critique of the academic origins of the book at the end more explicitly from the issue of Nocella and the FBI, perhaps even pulled it apart into two separate pieces entirely. The setup of this sort of weakens the whole thing. As it stands, some of these critiques are "grey areas" and some are not. The involvement of of some academics in the publishing a book is not wholly surprising, the massive laundry list of phds as opposed to others on this is certainly pause for hesitation, though hardly grounds for refusing to book them an event (hell, book them an event and tear it to pieces publicly at your space, if you come to the conclusion that it really is that bad.) But this is a grey area, in that it could be leveled against a whole host of anarchist publishing, though probably to a lesser degree. There are a lot of academics just using the movement as a career vehicle, whether intentionally or not - then are some who genuinely are trying to play their position, siphen off money for good causes, and use their connections to help non academic folks get published. So it can be a grey area.

Teaching the FBI soft policing techniques is totally disgusting, and should be an immediate reason for distancing and avoidance of this project, at least in so far as the other authors are unwilling to decry it. If this isn't "black and white" i don't know what is , and id be suspicious of anyone apologizing for it. (Incidentally, it also provides an excellent platform fromwhich to espouse pacifists and fucking cops....)

also, nocella didn't snitch. he collaborated. we should be more precise with the terminology, as an exercise in clear thinking.
there's an argument that collaborating is worse than snitching -- at least frequently. collaborators don't have the excuse of being alone and manipulated that most snitches do.
but i'd focus less on nocella and more on the people who continue to call him an anarchist and include him in these kinds of projects.

Seriously? The guy just sounds like a misguided fucking liberal not Goebbels for christ sakes. The criticism is completely valid and the solution is to attack the idea that you can rationalize with the state. Calling him a snitch is just dumb, if we can agree on that it's an important start. If he now realizes his mistake and apologizes (not sure what he has or hasnt said) do you seriously think this article needs to be written? Minus of course the 75% of it that makes the author sound like he's writing from a straight edge mormon punk commune in Salt Lake City.

I don't understand why someone writing this kind of criticism should have the privilege of anonymity, or at the very least why anyone should take this seriously without ownership. They are attacking other anarchists, leveling accusations at them with no means of resolution. It's shouldn't be accepted.

damnit, where did I hide that comment?

Looking at you Minneapolis. Where this collaborator is a welcome fixture of the Twin Cities Anarchist Bookfair.

It was weird that Nocella was there. At least, they prevented that transphobic liberal from having a workshop on oppression at the Twin Cities Bookfair. Do a google search of "madison, wi anarchist" and you either see an article or video about her ( makes my hometown look silly...among many other wacky liberal capitalist things.)

To understand a movement or idea, you must know the history of that idea, and those who wrote this post do not show an understanding of anarchism and the historical need for intellectuals in any radical movement to articulate the purpose of the cause and those who act for and within it. This is how a movement spreads. I agree that there is danger in academizing radical ideas, but do not assume that just because someone is pursuing an education (which is vital to an anarchist society) that they cannot contribute to the cause. And don't assume that just because someone has "sucked dick in alley ways" that they understand both the struggle and how to move it forward. Also, please look up the word "speciesism" and then (re)consider your use of the word "pig." Hierarchy has a way of creeping into our lives where we least expect it. Sometimes, it helps to turn the mirror back on yourself.

Uhhh what?

The history of anarchist thought, especially in the US, is prole-ass immigrants, not academics, theorizing about shit.

Endless fucking drama. It's incredible that all of this energy is being spent talking shit on the internet.

To be fair, "shit talking on the internet" takes like 5 seconds.

haha serously, I hate when people come on these forums to self righteously proclaim the amount of wasted energy spent on "internet flame wars" . I literally browse, type some comments, then go on my merry way. Not really that energy consuming....

what about the push ups? don't you guys do push ups too? guys?

To be fair, though, some people manage to have 5 years or more of their life consumed in it.

Jeri Marie has had a job at some point. What does this say about her punk points?

Damn...US anarchists love them some drama.

She was a boss and now works to prove that 'trans people can be valuable to corporations'

...and Bakunin was an anti-semite. Can we now disregard everything else he ever said or did?



-D. Rovics

I know right? Like, anarchists would actually get farther if they stopped being against authority and we're just nicer to authoritarians, right?

OMG, thats exactly what I said!

Srsly, we'll get much further if we just purge everyone we deem not "pure" enough.

When you look up "Anarcho-Liberal" or "Progressive is not spelled A-N-A-R-C-H-I-S-T" in a dictionary, you'll see a picture of David Rovics.

I honestly think we should find the person who wrote this and make them publicly justify writing this. We can do it at the anarchist bookfair, Kink.com is right there, we can hire a good DOM to enact punishment. Can we make this happen?

A Brief Reply on Concerns about Queering Anarchism Talks

Recently we read a few criticisms, as far as we can tell started on Tumblr, about Queering Anarchism, the last of which asks spaces to cancel talks from the authors who contributed chapters to the book. These sorts of public denunciations are common among anarchists and communists, but we felt the need to respond because, frankly, we’re sympathetic to some of the arguments (though we also completely disagree with others, but hey, no anonymous public denunciation can be perfect!). So a few quick points to address here:

1. As far as we can tell, Anthony (one co-author in one chapter in the book) talked to police about peaceful conflict resolution. Anthony’s a Quaker and a pacifist and talked to police about retiring their violence. There are a couple of issues here. First, we disagree with Anthony – in fact, doing those kinds of talks is silly, talking to the police for any reason willingly is something no one should do, and we encourage Anthony to not do this. Secondly, this is not “snitching,” it is not being an “informant” – it is acting on pacifist impulses to resolve conflicts in ways without violence by talking to our enemies. We agree with the criticisms of Anthony’s actions, but not the frame here (i.e. accusing him of “snitching,” by publicly giving talks to police about conflict resolution and then publicly talking about that quite openly isn’t an accurate use of the term – we suggest, perhaps, “foolish”). Some of us have already voiced our objections to him doing this and some of us won’t be working with him anymore.

2. We are not sympathetic to the portrayal of Jerimarie as a “boss” (Jerimarie’s not, Jerimarie ran a small business and doesn’t anymore) or an “assimilationist” (anyone who actually knows Jerimarie in the Northeast knows *much* better than that – Jerimarie is brave as fuck and a solid anarchist). Jerimarie has worked with nonprofits and also on legislation that could improve people’s lives. Those efforts could certainly also have much more complicated and negative effects. A disagreement could be had about those tactics. But it is not any reason to publicly denounce anyone.

3. There are a lot of academics in the book. This is true. We’re also sympathetic to this argument. All of us think that more people who aren’t paid scholars should be writing about radical politics. The book was put together out of a call for papers. We accepted almost everything submitted and asked a few folks to add chapters where we thought pieces were missing. This book as it is, is what we got back.

Further, we also think that among anarchists and communists generally that these kinds of anonymous denunciations, in these sorts of sweeping terms, are damaging to decent conversations and debates about the way forward. Just in the last three weeks, we’ve witnessed a public denunciation of the Bay Area Book Fair for favoring a certain publisher; there was a public denunciation of it for being held at a place that films BDSM porn; there was a public denunciation of the 2nd Wave feminists who criticized BDSM porn by 3rd Wave feminists; then there was a public denunciation of the 2nd and 3rd Wave denunciations for not being anti-work!

It is also worth noting that the editors believed it was important to publish pieces even if they did not necessarily agree with them and have been upfront about that. This book was intended to foment debate and discussion, to tease out similarities and differences in ideas and analysis.

There are some interesting and possibly productive and destructive (in all the good ways) conversations to be had here: about the role of the police in society and how radicals should interact with them; about the non-profit industrial complex and reforms/reformism; about how people deal with money in their living situations with each other; about the role of the Academy and academics writing in books about radical politics. Maybe there are even debates to be had about the book fair. But these sorts of denunciations have become a sort of radical tabloid with their own weird and gross rhythm. We don’t have to like each other (I suspect we’re not going to) and we certainly don’t need to be nice to each other, but, as a contentious milieu, can we just start having those debates and retire the public denunciations? It’s beginning to feel all Situationist up in here.

-Some Contributors and Editors of Queering Anarchism

Seriously feel you on this. Whomever the author is does absolutely nobody good and the majority of the assertions within make any legit criticism of the book/authors not matter. I am sure they are reading this and if they are not just trying to be disruptive (because that is what you are being and NOT in a good way) hopefully they will think about the response here and realize they are doing it wrong.

One more comment: the author of this piece is YOU. I realise you know you've been caught, and are desperately trying to create another lie to cover your asses...I have never written a piece of propaganda for this site, why? Because I believe that propaganda is ALWAYS wrong. This is a friendly argument I had many years ago with one of your cadre, perhaps he remembers.

- an editor of Queering Anarchy, survivor of vile propaganda and gossip, currently being repressed by a self-styled Stalinists, a poet.

Huh? Clarification, plz

Sorry comrade! You are right, I will return and educate myself properly next time.

- an editor of queering anarchy, faulty stalinist who needs better education to improve myself

Actually I authored this piece
-Bob Black

1. No, he isn't a snitch or an informant, but he is a COLLABORATOR. That's a pretty condemnable offense. And fuck being a pacifist. That's a pretty heavy betrayal of anarchy.

2. If Jeramie owned a business and had employees acting under their instruction, then yes, they were a boss. Working on legislation, regardless of intention or hardness or whatever is still assimilation. That's just the way these words and concepts work. There are nuances, but at the base the terms still apply.

IGTT 7/10 for this line alone: "And fuck being a pacifist. That's a pretty heavy betrayal of anarchy."

Exactly what members of the Aufheben collective would write.

insurrectionism does not represent the entirety of the anarchist movement, and your claims that it does is a form of violence that shames non-insurrectionist into towing a line you believe is the only legitimate one. "anarchists want" X is false and misrepresentative of a beautiful and diverse political, ethical, and philosophical movement and tradition. as another anarchist, i believe we should be celebrating the diversity of our movement, and yes calling out and critiquing those practices and tactics we believe are collaborationist. i condemn any participation in the FBI academy, hands down. but you don't represent me, so don't make umbrella claims to provide yourself a holier-than-thou position from which to attack all of the "fake" anarchists compared to your "real" anarchism. to make those claims is by definition authoritarian - perhaps not in terms of a systematized structure of oppression, but certainly in terms of providing yourself authority and legitimacy over anyone who deviates from your position.

i do not support insurrectionary anarchism.

^this makes no sense.
being against policing, landlords, and bosses are not unique to "insurrectionary anarchism"
im pretty sure those are all basic tenants of _____-anarchy


also tenets*

"Our aim is insurrection." It is? That's not my aim. "Our goal is to destroy the university." It is? That's not my goal. I'm more interested in decolonization; building networks of love and solidarity; usurping the resources academia gives us (to work for/with communities in need; to create liberated spaces for intellectual exchange (thinking of police-free greek universities here); to de-institutionalize the university to make education free, public, accessible, and liberatory.)

My aims and goals are not the same as yours, so stop claiming the authoritative voice of anarchism. if you are so invested in representing "anarchism" as you see it, perhaps representative democracy would be more up your alley than participatory or direct democracy.

How exactly do you plan on decolonizing anything without an insurrection? Do you know what colonization means? Do you know that the university is one of the most powerful colonizer institutions, and has been since it came into existence? Greek Universities are not free of police and you cant "de-institutionalize" an institution. And yes...I have no interest in participatory direct democracy *GASP*

I learned about colonization at the university.

OK, there are some valid criticisms in here but the hysterical tone is a little much. I'm a bit tired of all the "queer insurrectionary anarchist" rhetoric where everyone has to be a queer trans sex worker person of color who takes it up the ass to be a "real anarchist." Also, collaborating with the FBI (serious offense) is not the same as teaching at a university (kind of crappy for an "anarchist" but most anarchists have to make a living somehow).

I mean, anarchists should love and embrace mentally ill junky survivors of rape, for example. But things seem to have gone a little awry when "anarchists" act like only mentally ill junky survivors of rape can have valid opinions. There's some serious middle class romanticizing of the oppressed going on in queer anarchism, methinks . . .


Billy "The Cheese Man" McGee ????

How do plan on insurrection when no one except a handful of very marginal and typically student anarchists support you? i know what colonization means; my understanding of it comes directly from indigenous and First Nations grassroots and radical decolonization movements and theory, which is often produced by dissident Native scholars within the institution; are you so narrow-minded in your view of education that you're ready to dismiss the significant contributions that feminists, people of color, and other radical academics have made to our cause? by the way, the university is not just an institution; it's also a *space* that we use to our own purposes, and have for centuries, in the advancement of our movement. what sort of society do you even envision, if there is no space for education, collaboration? are you familiar with liberatory pedagogy, the free school movement? or are you just so fixated on the idea of destruction, rather than creative and collaborative engagement with others, that you dogmatic reject anything that falls outside the purview of "insurrection" as you, and maybe a small cadre of others, see it? and just so we're clear, participatory or direct democracy means nothing other than the right of people to govern themselves free of coercion; this is probably the single most central tenant of anarchism in history.


clever! insightful! illuminative! liberatory!

tired, trite, boring, ahistorical, revisionist

and obviously, destructive insurrectionism is the solution to that. certainly not ahistorical, though, and more interpretive than revisionist. look, there are two important perspectives in the movement: one of destructive insurrectionism, one of creative community-building. "Create a new world in the shell of the old." My vision of a creative anarchism does not exclude an insurrectionist perspective; it can accomodate a diversity of perspectives which is something we should be striving for as anarchists - not monocultures of the mind. Your perspective does not permit for perspectives outside your own. I'd rather live in a liberatory and diverse society where we celebrate difference, rather than a dictatorship of a dominating insurrectionism.

if my proposal for a creative anarchism is tired, trite, and boring (which indeed it may be), it's at least relevant. insurrectionism: irrelevant, useless, self-serving, self-defeating - at least as you present it, as dogma.

You sound like someone who teacher at my school. I wonder what your students think of you.

Holy shit, did you actually read what you were saying, or does it all just come out without much filter? You apparently don't understand decolonization too well if you believe it can happen without an insurrectionary force. Also, universities aren't so noble as you delude yourself into believing, they are institutions, they do enforce the agenda of an institution, no matter how "radical" or "dissident" some professors are. Interesting that of all words you chose to use different forms of "collaboration" twice.

jesus, how fucking stupid are you. yeah ze totally made a freudian slip and is a secret snitch. just like im a born again christian.

-a different person

Monty Python, Judean People's Liberation Front Versus
The People's Front for The Liberation Of Judea!

seriously? my understanding of decolonization comes directly from my conversations and interactions with indigenous and FNs activists. these conversations do not involve insurrectionary anarchism or "insurrection" as you probably define it. it's about shifting fields of power, and this has to be accomplished through a number of methods. i'm also not valorizing the institution of the university; i fucking hate the institutionalized university, but i recognize its *potential* as a liberatory space. which is an even more important project to realize as universities become neoliberalized. also: "collaboration"??? you're really going there? i am fine with the word, as fine as i am with words like "co-operation," "partnership," "coordination," "mutual aid." I'm talking about collaboration between activists and radical communities; don't compare that to collaboration with the state or institutions.

i likewise am not going to say that dissident or radical scholars do not have troubling constraints placed upon them by the institutionalized university. but much (not all) of our understanding of power, surveillance, domination, racism, sexism, gender, agency, come from radicals within the university; these contributions are *valuable*, not to be dismissed simply by merit of the fact they came from university figures. scholars are not so constrained or embedded in the institution as you'd like to believe.

i presume that you, in some way, earn money to eat or pay rent. and i don't justify that coercion; i am anti-capitalism to the end. but working for the bosses, landlords, perpetuates the system just as much as writing from the academy does. the system is total; the fact that we are exchanging ideas through computers, with electricity, over the internet, proves as much. what's more important is finding creative ways to use the niches we can make within the system for liberatory purposes. we are all struggling; we are all complicit in one way or another, as long as we exchange even a penny or eat food we did not forage from the wild. anarchists find a diversity of ways to build niches and resistance, whether that be through living off the refuse of capitalism (freeganism) or using a barista job to pay rent and buy food so that you can do more worthwhile activist work. or reading zines, or printing them out, or going to a radical activist space where the collective pays rent to a landlord. we are implicated.

so stop shitting on people who are trying to realize liberation in ways different from yours. you are not the authority on what constitutes legitimate or illegitimate resistance. our limits on what constitutes legitimate practices and tactics should come from the community, not someone hiding behind a computer screen, imagining themselves as soooooo radical, more radical than those *fake* anarchists. you're not better than anyone else in the movement; we're only different. i appreciate that difference; apparently you do not.

Conversely, I'd point out that out that your belief that scholars are even free at all from the institutions that grant them power is utterly false. I never called you a fake anarchist, you on the other hand have touted yourself as a better anarchist multiple times all over this thread, merely because you're willing to have your politics be recuperated by academic institutions and state apparatuses.

love this

" but much (not all) of our understanding of power, surveillance, domination, racism, sexism, gender, agency, come from radicals within the university; these contributions are *valuable*, not to be dismissed simply by merit of the fact they came from university figures. scholars are not so constrained or embedded in the institution as you'd like to believe."

wow. just, wow.

how is this even debatable? many of the things that you think and say every day, which you probably consider self-evident, are at least partially the result of academic conversations in years past. everything "from the earth is round" to "system racist exists, reverse racism doesnt" to "gender and sexuality come in infinite forms." get a fucking clue.

I was totally gonna host an event with these people but then some anonymous people on the internet said I shouldn't so now these people and their book can fuck off. We're so lucky we have Anarchist News to maintain the purity of our Church!

i lol'd

lulz=spectacle. you are recuperated

i'm gesturing towards scholars like angela davis, bell hooks, michel foucault, judith butler, paolo freire, david graeber, edward said, noam chomsky, vine deloria jr., murray bookchin, taiaike alfred, ward churchill. and these are the most accessible names, since they themselves draw upon a long lineage of other obscurer thinkers. do you seriously believe these scholars have not made any contributions to our movement? are what they produced *only* institutional discourses?

insert contentless ad hominem about ____ scholar's lifestyle practices here

insert off topic comment here

Insert Coin. Press Start Player 1.

If you press up, up, down, down, left, right, left, right, B, A, it will do nothing.

Except that you've just crossed yourself and consecrated yourself to the service of Bob Avakian.

as someone who loves me some deloria, this is a non sequitor. the people you list are not anarchists.
we can learn from all kinds of folks, in all kinds of professions. that's a different subject entirely.

anarchists can be teachers/professors, but only if they treat it like a job, and don't rip off anarchist experiences and insights in order to get ahead.

i didn't say they were anarchists, i said they were radicals and i meant that in the broad sense that they critiqued systems and institutions of power. i agree that the scholar should not appropriate anarchist theory simply for the sake of career advancement. but i also believe there is a way to practice anarchism within the academy, but to do so requires engagement well beyond or outside the institution. but that's another conversation entirely.

anyway, i did a bit of googling and there is a North American Anarchists Scholars Network. so there are certainly lots of people trying to figure this out, too. we should support each other in struggle, not denigrate each other - we keep dividing ourselves enough as it is. but of course there are limits to this, which i think most anarchists would agree on - like collaboration with the FBI academy. but this is a issue of a community-derived ethics. it shouldn't be about dogmatic ideology.

your comments would make a fun drinking game if they weren't so boring

(the game would be to drink every time there's a buzzword)

also thanks to the moderators for hiding comments that support my position, and not the original author's. that's TOTALLY an awesome anarchist practice.

I swear I just had it RIGHT here... where the hell did i just put that comment? HONEY! DID YOU HIDE THE COMMENT AGAIN! DID THE CAT GET TO IT!


God damn cat...

I hate to break to you kids, but the academy does not care about non-academic writings. No one is making a mint of any of this.

Yeah but they'll care when I'm stink-bombing their library or cutting electrical power in their faculty.

Duh duh duh duh!!! Pwned.

The language of the wild will always be superior to any sophisticated culture.

It's about time someone stood up to academic libraries. But such small and temporary disruptions as stink bombs and power outages...? Your "wild" sounds awfully mild.

Good. Mints aren't vegan anyway.

oreos are.

Q: How many people from BashBack does it take to change a lightbulb?
A: Fuck you, cop!

Q: How many Insurrectionary Queer Anarchocops does it take to organize a book burning?
A: About five, with the help of AnarchistNews, Facebook, and similar corporate media

Q. How many anarchists does it take to change a lightbulb?
A. Something highly controvertial.

OP Q: "However, does a book comprised almost entirely of works by professors and aspiring academics accurately represent queer anarchism?"
Well if you do 500 interviews methodically then probably.

OP Q: "Do any of these academics know what it is like to have to fight to survive? Do they have any real experience participating in queer anarchist struggle? Have they done anything other than turn our stories into self-serving theories to be sold to university for a fat pay check or to bolster their CVs? What makes these individuals so qualified to write an entire book on the “queering” of “anarchism?” What gives these people more legitimacy on the subject of “queering anarchism” than those of us who have lived on the streets, sucked dick in alley ways, and fought bashers, pigs, and johns? Should we allow bosses, landlords, professors, academics, and snitches to be the voice of queer anarchism?"

A: this is an ad homenim and well does it really discredit them from writing about queers if the point is to tell the story which they can gather through hundreds of interviews which they then check with the interviewees if their analysis is correct?

So the prolier than thou shit isn't tired yet? I'll check back in a year or two then.

In a year or two there will just be a new generation and these will have passed on (to the university?).

Though there is certainly an argument to be made that such a speaking engagement might well amount to a betrayal of principle, I don't think that letting the FBI pay you $800 to come to their academy and tell them that they should stop kicking in activists' doors amounts to anything like snitching.

these academic authors may not be the "best" voice to represent queering anarchism, but where is your book? did you write a fucking book? should we all wait for you, authors of this tripe, the almighty authority on anarchism? when are you going to find time to write this hypothetical book when you spend all your time googling and talking shit and gossiping about people who are actually doing the work you're not? this is a very weak critique (only valid and solid point is talking to FBI, but then you muddle that by gossiping with hyperbole and name calling) this really is a superficial complaint more than a critique. also, you need to spend some time working on a vision and transformation, critique is only one part of the task of radical theory. and you didn't say a thing about the content of the book! even if there were valid problems with the authors (you didn't actually articulate any, just gossip) that doesn't mean there is not value to the book. a lot of important and valuable books have been written by people who were assholes, and conflating the ideas with the people who wrote them is bullshit.

stop using the term anarchist to describe yourself when you are sectarian shitheads. this paragraph quoted below eliminates any credibility you have to speak on anything:

"Anarchists do not hope for a better policing apparatus. We want to destroy policing. Anarchists do not want dialogue with the most sophisticated and violent counter insurgency agency in the history of the world. Our aim is insurrection. Anarchists do not seek legitimacy in academia. Our goal is to destroy the university. Anarchists are not landlords who throw people out on the streets. We want landlords dead and property destroyed. Anarchists are not bosses. We organize to destroy work itself."

what a bunch of shit. these authors don't get to speak for queer anarchists but YOU get to speak on behalf of all those who would call themselves anarchists? YOU get to define who is and is not an anarchist and what all of us believe or should believe and should be doing?
stop trying to one-up everyone else in critique, stop gossiping and talking shit on the internet, stop posturing and start organizing.

I agree with your point about the problem inherent in trying to represent a queered anarchism. If it's a problem of some voices going unheard, I would agree with the solution of more book-making, blogging, pamphleting, etc rather than silencing or ad hominem attacks. Ethnographic research is not my area but I understand that there is a vigorous ongoing debate over responsible activist research on human subjects.

What I would add is a call to civility in the way we talk to one another or about one another. A lot of adherents to queer and/or anarchist existence live and think in isolation or in circumstances that make day-to-day life a struggle, nevermind building knowledge foundations and the networks that would get them audiences and publications. I know several people who have given up; I myself go through intermittent depressive breakdowns between periods of optimism or impassioned activity. And I could have it much worse, really.
Rather than responding to nasty words as though they were nasty, that is, to imagine such an intention and be affected accordingly, we who want to practice anarchist communist principles from our very hearts, have some responsibility to examine the source of miscommunication and bad feelings, and to figure out how we can help one another be more convivial. For that Queering Anarchism and companion critiques are invaluable.

Even the collaboration with the state in this case is not something that I think would automatically merit ostracism or public shaming when we are all to some extent, whether we like it or not, collaborating with state power and capital.
While everyone has strong opinions about what they think should be different and I think debate can be very healthy, I really think there's nothing to be lost in giving a kind word or letting things go. Up to individual discernment. Yes let's start organizing, even at the level of organizing the wreckage in our own minds.

I can sympathize with you but as an asexual, I cannot bring myself to call myself an anarchist, because an anarchist is most specifically not only a political position, it is also a cultural position as well, and it would seem that only gay and bisexual people could ever be considered to be a part of your culture.

Glad you made this point! I'd be interested to hear more about asexuality and anarchism: It doesn't seem to be taken up much in the Queering Anarchism essays!
One thought: there's nothing with asexuality (at least as I understand it) that would be necessarily incompatible with either queer or anarchist orientations. Further, both of these (queer / anarchist) involve an emphatic rejection (or at least complication) of strictly identitarian cultural or political positioning. Abbey Volcano makes this point in "Police at the Borders." What's your take on lysistratic non-action as nonviolent resistance?

"Feds have access cause assholes like Nocella
are willing to accept money to talk at their university and then go around
connecting with the very people who would otherwise be at risk... There is
NEVER a justification for public (or
any) figures within the animal/earth liberation milieu to speak to the Feds
or any government agency."


This was written by a long-time Anarchist concerned about activist-types working with the cops and other authoritarian institutions.

"The next day Anthony J. Nocella gave a talk for the release of his book “Call to Compassion.” Anthony talked about his friendship with Will and how long they have known each other."

- From http://theveganpolice.com/main/?p=1391

All these activists working with each other and having relationships to the FBI is not good news.

"Anthony Nocella discussed snitching further and implored the crowd to become friends with those they organize with; “we eliminate snitches if we become friends." "


Why is he advising radicals and the FBI at the same time ? Also, he's worked with ROTC and similar groups.

now the anarchist purity police have decided you can't even be a landlord and rent space out. good luck with the further marginalization of an already small movement @news trollolols. the rest of us who have matured just a tiny bit don't take our politics so so seriously

no you

Talking to - oh no! Talking with scum!
Collaborating with - oh shit!
Socialising with - oh what horror!
Lecturing to - oh why would you want to HELP them !?
Partying with - oh glad you didn't! Hey what you didn't...did you?

And with the cops/feds: Those are all so big and glaring No-No's!

There must be a code of silence and non-cooperation AGAINST the State authorities.
Don't lend them creditability by association.

So this was very unwise.
Stupid Cupid
Silly dilly
Canal anal
la la smile!
Gawd Night!

Add new comment

Filtered HTML

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

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
To prevent automated spam submissions leave this field empty.
Subscribe to Comments for "Queering Snitches, Landlords, and Bosses? Why Anarchists Spaces Must Not Host &quot;Queering Anarchism&quot;"