TOTW: Where?

  • Posted on: 29 May 2017
  • By: thecollective

The Bay Area Anarchist scene is in ruins. NYC isn't much better. All the big cities that have, in the past, been the it places to go for anarchism in North America are now priced out of reach. Where do we go to meet f2f now?

Carrboro NC, Sacramento CA, Madison WI, Ann Arbor MI? Are there still rust belt towns where there are a already a coupld dozen people and houses are available for cheap? Is there some rural town that is half empty because the youth have blown away? Should we set up a base (for resistance or whatever) or continue to disperse into the the suburbs and exoburbs of america?

Is the best way for anarchism to last (or to win) to concentrate our activity in a particular location or is it to diffuse our way across this land mass? Should we be building Utopian communitieis or struggling for change in the (imaginary) communities we currently live in?

category: 

Comments

Its not outpriced! Autonomous zones exist beneath the turnpikes and bridges of NA at the great intersections of human desire for free. The human strike rises out of the gutters and reaches the stars of the cosmic abyss. From there the new millenium sows the seeds of the spontaneous demonopolizing of capital and the creation of an organically evolved aesthetic.

Thank you for your prescient
Insight.

This post reeks of drug use.

I say that the entire population of anarchists in the U.S. go meet up in Lebanon, Kansas, which is the geographic center of the contiguous United States. Once there, we pool our money together to buy a bunch of rural farmland and we create an intentional community to live together at. After that is established, we have an ongoing series of lengthy conversations IN PERSON to get clear and figure out exactly what the hell it is that we have been doing, what we want to be doing instead and how we can realistically achieve those goals.

I have done some research on it, and I think that Smith Center, Kansas would be a better place to say that the anarchists of the U.S. should meet up at. It is still close to the geographic center of the U.S., but it is an actual town with the various amenities that a town has to offer. Smith Center is the county seat of the county that Lebanon is in, plus I have been able to find actual property for sale there, whereas I have't been able to find any for sale in Lebanon, KS.

The population of Smith Center is 1,616, which means that in this case the population of all the anarchists in the U.S. could possibly be greater than the population of that town. We can take it over!

take over
cake lover
coneloser
colonise

right, we can colonise smith center.

colonisation; the forgotten anarchist tactic

Back in the 19th century anarchists used the word "colonies" instead of "intentional communities". So we can start using that word again, if you want.

Also, when you look at the history of Smith County, Kansas, it's population has been steadily declining since the year 1900. The state of Kansas in general is also known to have a number of different ghost towns. This means that property could be purchased there pretty cheaply.

Smith County, Kansas is awaiting an anarchist a renaissance!

As long as the ghost towns don't become tidy little municipalities with a council they have great potential. I've thrown my roll down in some of them, WARNING, keep a mask or damp cloth over your mouth when you move in, the years of dust may be irritating to folk prone to allergic reactions, and rotten floorboards are hard on the shin bones.

smith center isn't in any way already a colonization of indigenous territory or anything

Settle down General! How many bridges, turnpikes and parks with toiletblocks are there in this here Smith Centre?

Practical liberation economics
Could be helpful in devising a scheme of
Investment in such a project.

You're on here promoting the idea of taking over a small rural town. That is exactly what neo-nazi's and militant white nationalists do. What good company one keeps!

"Pool our money together". You have money?

Check your privilege.

Why do you need to own property in order to do anything, or figure anything out?

the language of privilege requires a level of privilege not known by the masses; check it, or, in other words, leave your privilege at the door.

Obviously having money is a function of having work. Most of us work. duh.

No idea of what your first sentence means. You are taking what I said out of context and too literally. Obviously we all have at least some money. The above poster assumed most or all anarchists had the kind of money to be able to afford to buy land.

the question of land purchasing simply depends on someone coming into money or pooling resources to produce a down-payment which then would be a matter of covering a monthly mortgage. Having 8 folx behind one on a mortgage is not difficult. It would be like making rent a matter of co-ownership. And hey, at the end of the day it would be no worse than simply losing the rent you paid the landlord, although in the case of your leaving, it would be a matter of gifting space to someone.

Conversations around privilege require the privilege to know about a language game that simply doesn't affect most everyday people, folx that just want to survive. Its the language of the party for the masses.

Yep, I'd even take that good analysis a step further and say that privilege is on the verge of becoming an obsolete reference to a value system of a now non-existing class consciousness. "Language of the party for the masses", is an eloquent way to describe propaganda, unfortunately in the 21st century it has been subliminally converted into accessible credit and a strict set of rules to obey if one is to acquire a credit rating.

Not everyone has bad credit. Even some anarchists have decent credit.

Are corporate entities allowed to have credit in the US? Very likely they are. If so, you know where I'm going with this.

Its not about how much capital one has. Gilligan's Island remember? For the billionaire guy Mr Howell, his capital was useless, but he still had maximum credit, or, the potential to pay in the future. The ability to aquire a high quality of life is the new privilege, it doesn't have the sting it used to have.

And ability is credit rating. Its not necessarily a class inheritance condition like it used to exclusively be regarded as, its a slap in the face that leftist poor folk use regarding inequality.

Not about good or bad, I should have been more explicit and used the term 'usury' in describing the rules to be followed to have credit rating as an imaginary asset and how liability is really a deferred criminal sentence within that system's legal apparatus. Privilege these days is knowing the loopholes to avoiding accountability, in the way that Maddoff accumulated 5 billion dollars but actually had zero assets. The whole edifice is founded on a figment of mass collective imaginations. Sure there's still the old inherited dynastic wealth and privilege but, do they really have a better standard of living or has this aristocracy attained inner-peace? All the shallow materialistic obsessions and prestigious reputations to maintain, they're still keeping up with the Jones but on a lavish scale. In reality they are still intellectual plebes without any connection to the whole liberated 'beingness' of Zen hobo existence

How did I git the $$$ to buy, pay off, and develop my beloved Land in the backwoods? I lived in a truck w/camper shell for 6 years while self-employed in a skilled trade. Such PRIVILEGE! And surely I MUST be a Racist, Misogynist, Homophobic, Transphobic, Imperialist Monster! (Especially since only horrid, LOATHSOME working-class whites - the Primary Beneficiaries of White Supremacy, and The Cause of Everything BAD in America, live in the backwoods.)

The idea of owning property together would be to use it to use it to live on, grow food on, and establish businesses on in order to bring in money to pay for that which can be grown or built by those there.

As I see it, the process of figuring things out together would be a very long process. As in, taking multiple years. And in the meantime, people's needs still need to be met. Hence a multi-year process of living together, working together, as well as thinking & talking through together.

Here is a perfect piece of land that can be used for this endeavor:

http://www.landwatch.com/Smith-County-Kansas-Land-for-sale/pid/28423548

The idea of a bunch of supposed anarchists pooling in money to buy a large piece of land sounds even more like suicide than simply just squatting some discarded land. So assume some people become landowners of that chop of land in Smith, Kansas.... Okay, woohoo! You are now anarchist land owners.

Then what next?

Nobody's holding you back from behaving like full asshole landlords, telling who can come "benefit from the land" and who can't... in what ways and according to what rules... then just hang on with your new or already-existing clique orbiting around the landlords.... yadyyada same old story no?

Then a few months or years later... Congrats, chaps, you've strangled all hopes for an anarchy commune.

What could hold someone back? A law? Brute force? Isn't that just as much a problem in squatting situations? Are you talking about a difference in principle? Because in practise the potential to issue the decree that "X can; y can't" is not specific to land-ownership.

There are ways to organize things to prevent stuff like that from happening. The Federation of Egalitarian Communities has set up some structures that can be utilized here:
http://www.thefec.org

haha i feel like this whole idea comes up and the same discussion happens every few years. last time people were going ballistic about whether there were going to be cows.

And turn anarchy into an activity and practice not a position/solution struggle.

Anarcho-drones can't think of being anything else than fixed anarchist identities.

Sure. You lead the way. Show us your anarchist activity.

Not anarch(ist) activity. Ist is indicative of a position not a practice. Also, you should need no one to lead the way, just do it.

Nice try. 'ist' is a descriptive suffix on nouns. It can be used to denote a person who practices something, or is concerned with something.
So go ahead, tell me what your anarchist activity is (besides sitting in your mom's basement typing comments all day).

Is based on a position solution based orientation instead of a life and activity practice. Think of Zen like activity but for anarchy and again it's anarchic not anarchist.

"Sure but the 'ist' in this case Is based on a position solution based orientation instead of a life and activity practice. Think of Zen like activity but for anarchy and again it's anarchic not anarchist."

What do you mean "in this case"? What case?

A Buddhist is someone who practices and believes in Buddhism. Same with anarchist. Your pedantic abstraction of some imagined difference between anarchy and anarchist/ism is retarded. Just stop.

Is someone who actually practices and ritualizes on a day to day level. The point I've been making is that the ritualistic practice is what is missing from the idea of anarchy. Sure not every 'ist' falls under the position/solution umbrella, that's not what I am saying. Anarchy related to the 'ist' however is largely based on the position solution conception.

you can see for yourself what lack of success i've had in trying to make the same or similar distinctions with others who 'take language literally' and therefore, 'just don't get it'.

and i don't always understand your approach to explaining the distinction. i like nietzsche's approach in pointing out that there is no such thing in physical reality as 'thing-in-itself being', so that there are no local sources of action [local sourcing is impossible in a transforming relational continuum]. 'killings' are not sourced by 'killers', 'rapes' are not sourced by 'rapists', 'terrorism' is not sourced by 'terrorists' and 'anarchy' is not sourced by 'anarchists', not in the physical reality of our actual experience where relational dynamics are the necessary-essential mothering ground (context) that inductively actualizes foreground 'local headline event' content, semantically captured as "Thing-In-Itself Causal Agent Jumpstart-Authors Action and Result".

For people who do not get hung up on abstract being-based semantic realities, who go with their actual experience, all activity derives from relational dynamics; e.g. "it takes a whole community (relational dynamic) to raise a rapist/killer/terrorist/anarchist". [we ourselves are developments (agents of transformation) within the relational continuum]

noun-and-verb (being-based) language-and-grammar puts little cartoons in our head where we see the rapist and his victim against a blank background, like seeing hurricane katrina give a lashing to new orleans against a blank background, ... nowhere to be seen in the simple cartoon is the hot tropical sun, the warm surfacing ocean currents, ... the long term weather pattern infusions; i.e. nowhere to be seen is the epigenetic inductive actualizing influence, ... just these cartoonized, being-based semantic personifications, ... anthropomorphisms coming from our Western 'ego' archetype, semantic reality constructions that are so convenient and thought-economical that our habitual use of them obscures the physically real relational complexity that hides beneath them.

anyhow, good luck with it. i hope you find a breakthrough way to get your point across.

noun-and-verb (being-based) language-and-grammar puts little cartoons in our head where we see the rapist and his victim against a blank background, like seeing hurricane katrina give a lashing to new orleans against a blank background, ... nowhere to be seen in the simple cartoon is the hot tropical sun, the warm surfacing ocean currents, ... the long term weather pattern infusions; i.e. nowhere to be seen is the epigenetic inductive actualizing influence, ... just these cartoonized, being-based semantic personifications, ... anthropomorphisms coming from our Western 'ego' archetype, semantic reality constructions that are so convenient and thought-economical that our habitual use of them obscures the physically real relational complexity that hides beneath them.

anyhow, good luck with it. i hope you find a breakthrough way to get your point across.

For people who do not get hung up on abstract being-based semantic realities, who go with their actual experience, all activity derives from relational dynamics; e.g. "it takes a whole community (relational dynamic) to raise a rapist/killer/terrorist/anarchist". [we ourselves are developments (agents of transformation) within the relational continuum]

you can see for yourself what lack of success i've had in trying to make the same or similar distinctions with others who 'take language literally' and therefore, 'just don't get it'.

and i don't always understand your approach to explaining the distinction. i like nietzsche's approach in pointing out that there is no such thing in physical reality as 'thing-in-itself being', so that there are no local sources of action [local sourcing is impossible in a transforming relational continuum]. 'killings' are not sourced by 'killers', 'rapes' are not sourced by 'rapists', 'terrorism' is not sourced by 'terrorists' and 'anarchy' is not sourced by 'anarchists', not in the physical reality of our actual experience where relational dynamics are the necessary-essential mothering ground (context) that inductively actualizes foreground 'local headline event' content, semantically captured as "Thing-In-Itself Causal Agent Jumpstart-Authors Action and Result".

^^^^^ TLDR: context, it's called context.

Precisely!
"We" are always, already multiplicities
Arising from force- fields of relational
Indications with emphasis on connecting,
Cooperating, coordinating, exploring attractive
Viewpoints, styles, movements; enjoined
By sympathetic sensibilities. "We" form
Projects of creativity with respect to new
And unique paths of mapping out better
zones of autonomy. These include the relavent
Topics here being discussed as to signals,
signs, traces, tracks, under-takings including
Different types of abodes consonant with particular habitats in certain ways of
Co-op-eration. Albert's anarchist economics
Can assist us in exploring ways to conceive,
Congeal , all the while expressing ways to
Conjure up projects of "being there".
As to your sense: we don't act-on but instead
Reside With a place in a milieu conducive
To our desires.
The Project in Kansas is but a case in point-
And a good one at that as to sorting out
Our priorities .

Me and you are communicating a new and different form of idea which simply requires that it be put out there repeatedly regardless of whether it is picked up.

For what it's worth the post-left crowd on reddit do get my points as well as some of the post leftists here. Anews does still have a lot of leftoids(though not the worst as exist on /r/anarchism kismo ect but still the usual suspects) as well as those that are rooted to the bad rituals of activist struggle oriented anarchism. They've absorbed the worst of anarchist meetspace. The likes on reddit are more open minded simply because they have yet to have these long lasting habits. You yourself could try posting there more often as you will fine more of my type there.

I agree that anarchy is not sourced but to be actualized it does need a living activity similar to ritualistic practices of the past. The 'ist' crowd simply don't get that. As I pointed out in the religion thread the problems have inverted themselves in regards to the more religious ages of the past and the secular age today. In the old religious time practice was very latent and active on a day to day basis but it was conditioned on an alien belief in a godhead or end time event. In the secular age we less believe in the godhead but life and activity(Emile Armand individualist anarchism) lack the day to day practices of the past which anarchy should be. The position and solution now stands in place of practice and intentional activity with the same eschatological structure in place and because of that there is less of a sense of belonging then ever.

Ironically the activist struggle 'ist' aspect of anarchy where anarchy is eschatologically placed does encompass ritualistic activity and practice as everything human invariably does. It just happens to suck. Anarchy should very much be a practice like Zen on a day to day basis.

"Me and you are communicating a new and different form of idea which simply requires that it be put out there repeatedly regardless of whether it is picked up."

Yes, me and you -- I don't give a fuck about grammar, yo, that's how completely free I am from the strictures that confine so many others of lesser abilities -- will repeat ourselves over and over again until we are blue in the face and everyone else has stopped reading our posts because, like, you know, we have nothing else to do with ourselves except repeat the same NEW IDEAS over and over again.

the "breakthrough" was intended more in the sense of "listening not to me but to the logos" where the reader's elucidation comes on as if inductively stimulated by a koan, rather than by "achieving a clear translation of your intended meaning".

my sense is that the word 'anarchism' befuddles communications, so it is tough to 'go straight for it' [not rejecting that approach, just musing on the challenges].

meanwhile, i understand what you mean about zen-like ritual and to me that means suspending positive intention so that one can be more fully 'in the now' of 'the unfolding situation'. this is made more challenging if one's everyday environment is a crowd of people fully occupied with positivist-intentionist dynamics; i.e. an 'anarchism' consciously focused on, in this case, tends to take on the same sort of positivist-intentionist sense and thus show up as a 'competitor' to capitalist and other positivist-intentionist dynamics.

only when the positivist-intentionist focus subsides will 'anarchism' as day-to-day (wu wei) ritual re-establish. the current restoring of 'epigenetics' to its natural precedence over positive-intentionist 'science' is an implicit contributor to anarchist revival.

my sense is that the word 'anarchism' befuddles communications, so it is tough to 'go straight for it' [not rejecting that approach, just musing on the challenges].

only when the positivist-intentionist focus subsides will 'anarchism' as day-to-day (wu wei) ritual re-establish. the current restoring of 'epigenetics' to its natural precedence over positive-intentionist 'science' is an implicit contributor to anarchist revival.

the "breakthrough" was intended more in the sense of "listening not to me but to the logos" where the reader's elucidation comes on as if inductively stimulated by a koan, rather than by "achieving a clear translation of your intended meaning".

meanwhile, i understand what you mean about zen-like ritual and to me that means suspending positive intention so that one can be more fully 'in the now' of 'the unfolding situation'. this is made more challenging if one's everyday environment is a crowd of people fully occupied with positivist-intentionist dynamics; i.e. an 'anarchism' consciously focused on, in this case, tends to take on the same sort of positivist-intentionist sense and thus show up as a 'competitor' to capitalist and other positivist-intentionist dynamics.

We do not have access to the way things really are; we have access to what we say about them; but saying things are linguistic constructs is ridiculous. For evidently I am not simply what I am recognized as. Saying things are will-o-the-wisp manifestations of constitutive forces is also ridiculous because our explanations have to stop somewhere. Simplicity of explanation demands something like natural kinds; what does complexity get us anyways? Its not that its false to say things are simple, or complex; its that the language games we choose depend on the games we wish to play. After all these years of trying to understand the point you are making, i still don't see the pragmatic value in talking about everything when we are simply talking about something that is essencing.

In other words, depending on the language game we wish to play, one of simplicity or one of stupid complexity, we can say beings are independent or dependent--depending on what we mean by "dependence'. Obviously things don't live in vacuums; but it is a ridiculous story to say that my existence depends on some secluded individual living in the alps. Therefore we have to clarify what we mean by dependence, and what we mean by independence. Obviously some of us are not-dependent on Emile's mom.

The Ding an Sich was a Kantian construct divined to create a problem for realists; but the language of Kant was foreign to the world of Aristotle (even though he tried real hard to make it seem representative. The medievals and the ancients took it for granted that there was something to be like in being human that is very much unlike what it is to be like an animal. And so, looking back, post Kant, they now appear to be, in an obscure way, attempting to theorize the noumena. But that's a silly story, to say nothing of anachronisms. If you look at the value of essence, and being, and form and matter, substance language was simply and always a matter of talking about mereological mutilation and thisness. Because obviously humans do not naturally become birds, or other kinds of being. In other words, there is still a use for the language of natural kinds because classifications are evidently fixed, and at best growing in classification. One can be extremely pragmatic about this; and it doesn't require a lot of thinking about it; and yet, it may require redescriptions: hence, Heidegger tried to rescue this language of essence with his word: essencing. Saving the object for phenomenology to let it be to open us onto truth (alethia) is where we could be; and yet you seem to be still stuck in a weird language game of subjective hopes and table thumping...

Again: why should we talk your way? The language we use is fine, provided we are ironic about it.

Yes, essencing, very important. You mention a dependency upon moms, like I'm dependent upon yours on a nightly basis.

To be in the sense of disclosenness.
In reference to the topic, the Kansas
Option, reveals much as to our desire
To find ways to collaborate under
A specific( if imprecise) example. In that regard the exploration of this particular topic is right-
on as to our potential, differential ability, opportunity, to move-on. Heidegger' description
And elaboration of domicile is key to our
existential and libertarian sensibilities of
Place as well as related poetry of Holderin.

A Buddhist can be non-practicing, just like a lapsed Catholic. They still each have their beliefs, and it is their beliefs that grant them the suffix 'ist'. An anarchist self identifies as an anarchist, whether he/she is engaged in activity or not, due to the beliefs they hold. This is true of any and all beliefs, from anarchism to nihilism. A position-solution-conception does not make someone any less of an anarchist, or Marxist, or any other 'ist'.

Anarchy is a form of society. People who believe in this form of society and want to bring it about are called anarchists.

Of course the mere belief is what you go back to, the point is that modern elective/proposed 'ist' ideologies do not have a practice that is integral to their existence. The problem with anarchism in the pure ideological sense is that there is scant examples of an anarchic practice that sets the example for anarchy in the world. It simply goes the route of elective proposed struggle and contestation which makes up most of its discourse.

I see anarchy as an activity and practice not a society. It does not need to be brought in. That is something I associate with beginning middle end historical orientation. I see anarchy as ahistorical and temporally now.

Hey fuckwipe, you're the one who keeps making a big stink out of some imagined difference between the terms anarchy and anarchist / ism. It doesn't matter whether there is a practice integral to its existence. That has nothing to do with anything. I can call myself an atheist and have no ritual or practice that sets the example for atheism in the world.

The term anarchy literally means 'without rulers', so even by definition, it is not an activity, but a state or form of social existence. It is not defined by activity or practice, but by the negative condition of the absence of political authority.

Go ask your mom to make you a sandwich.

Non hierarchical practices matter in the presence or absence of hierarchy. Anarchy was defined and conceived the context of hierarchy(a belief based on practices and other forms of power) and getting away from it. Atheism is more of a belief/non belief based judgement on the question of God. There is less of an imperative for a performative practice in the life of an atheist.

A state or form of existence is not separate from its practices. These are the reasons that hierarchies do not arise in an anarchically definable culture. In other words, fuckwipe, a state or form of existence is not passive. There are day to day life and activities that make it so. This should be a 101 no duh realization. Any form of structured belief actually has to be lived, believed in and(yes)practiced to be maintained.

But in the absence of non-hierarchical practices, one can still believe in them and aspire to them. We call such beliefs and aspirations 'anarchism' and the people who believe and aspire to them 'anarchists'.

"Atheism is more of a belief/non belief based judgement on the question of God. There is less of an imperative for a performative practice in the life of an atheist."

Bingo! So you should therefore have no problem calling someone who does not believe in God an athe'ist'. Just like you should therefore have no problem calling someone who does not believe in political authority an anarch'ist'.

But the issue is tying the aspirations to some historical eschatological event in time as well as primarily tie the idea of anarchy to elective positions and proposed solutions. I'm not against the 'ism' approach to some degree as the position solution paradigm is part of our world. Anarchy however should PRIMARILY be defined by practicing and believing ANARCHS.

I still call myself an anarchist by position/solution if it is asked of me however being an anarch(as well as being and egoist and nihilist) comes first.

A Zen Buddhic tendency can never be non-practicing. It is a continually self-engaging omnipresent awareness.

This was reply to anon 22.11, concerning lapses in belief systems.

The simple thought patterns and awareness are enough to make a difference in life orientation.

Just like the simple thought patterns and awareness of believing and wanting anarchy are enough to call someone an anarchist.

When you have reached nirvana, and stopped the cycle of rebirth, you are no longer practicing Buddhism, you are being it.

Even if you never attain enlightenment, the whole point of zen is not to "practice" but to "be".

I know Zen and SE is correct. For those inexperienced with Zen, we would describe it as Buddhic in nature, or very Buddhy, not Buddhism or Buddhist. Its pretty simple and actually the reverse of being pedantic, which tends to be a quality of those renowned for walls of text and not concise paragraph legth statements.

I'm a buddhist cos I wouldist cos I couldist as it shouldist,,,,,,,beist

wu wei is where one allows things to unfold naturally and doesn't force the issue [as in the martial arts]. it puts the voyagist in us into its natural precedence over the destinationist in us. as a collective moving together (as in a traffic flow), we are all better served when we let the unfolding situation inductively actualize our movements [as in our voyagist mode]. when we force the issue because we are single-mindedly focused on optimizing our own destination-attainment [as in our destinationist mode], our interventions engender unanticipated and unaddressed relational complexities ['externalities'].

there are no Gods nor masters in the everyday anarchic flow of life [until conflict arises in police states] but we have all experienced the difference of being in destinationist flow-collectives compared with voyagist flow-collectives. those anarchists with the wu wei ethic put voyagist mode before destinationist mode. if one is trying to get one's pregnant wife-in-labour to the hospital, it is good to find oneself in a voyagist collective whose situationist not-doing opens up passageways that accommodate naturally unfolding need for positive action.

It's easy... just walk in front of any house or apartment building. Then consider that SE might be somewhere enclosed within these walls, busy at "relaxing from social constaints", they you have it.

Denman island, duh.

Train in systema. Get married/reproduce. Get cabin fever and be sad.

Basically denman in a nutshell.

Looks like the hot bed of that shitty transcanadian crowd of "anarchists", who've now mostly moved to Montreal. I'd be going to Denman this summer just to annoy them around, yet there are a thousand better isles around the world where we can build anarchist utopia. Rapanui's been on top of my list for a while... but nobody cares going the distance, as usual.

... shitty places in Canada, Hamilton Ontario has anarchists who mostly don't hate each other and who do some projects sometimes. Thanks, Hamilton!

Id rather live in the hammer than in montreal, just saying.

Hamilton @ here - let's be real, plenty of us fucking hate each other. More importantly, tho, if there's one thing you could do for us steeltown folks it's to tell everybody to stop fucking moving here.

Honestly, I would totally get behind a large-scale effort to start an anarchist community somewhere, if it looked well-though-out. What I'm totally done with is the hipster stampede from town-to-town searching for working-class authenticity toward whatever town is "in" this year. It was East Van, then Halifax, then Winnipeg, etc - looking at all those neighbourhoods now I can't help but wonder if maybe we weren't the best influence. The same few dozen people recreating the same isolated social microcosm in each town they all hop to that summer does very little for the prospects of long-term liberation and a little too much for the prospects of yuppie gentrification.

"tell everybody to stop fucking moving here. "

Go away, knaves! You are unworthy for our utopian Great Lakes anarchist wonderland! lol

"What I'm totally done with is the hipster stampede from town-to-town searching for working-class authenticity toward whatever town is "in" this year. "

Tell that to Shadowsmoke. hehe

On my part I've just been to Hamilton once and given how nobody has offered me a place where to crash, I thought it wasn't that awesome or special so I just moved along. Not saying the folks there aren't doing cool shit tho. As long as anarchy-ists don't bring up full living anarchy and we don't have some kind of North American "Christiania", most somewheres will be just like anywheres.

Nothing to do with spontaneity or immediacy of existence. It's an inner city sideshow.

Perhaps, yet still way closer to lived anarchy than our inner city bullshit communal spaces on rent.

Living space is just a means to this.

Love how your measure of a town is how easily strangers offer to house you because anarchy!

In anarchy there is no such thing as "strangers", which is a reified linguistic product of the capitalist division politics and property. So no there is no reason to not include newcomers based on such xenophobic sensitivities.

Though there may be other more relative and debatable causes.for not including some people.

How about I'll decide who comes in to my house based on my criteria and you can shove your pedantic lectures up your ass? K, sweetheart? :)

ditto. the comment being responded to is pathetic and has no connection with actual, lived life in the world.

The "get away from MY lawn" idiot, or the more anarchically-consistent comment?

You're such a douche. But then again, I'm accustomed to making myself clear with things besides dialogue so, that's fine.

Like if they're crack addicts or pedophiles (which is strange behavior) amirite, or am I just being xenophobic and politically incorrect?

The point is, there's no special category of developing relationships for anarchy. Trust is developed over time. Otherwise, savy folks who've been hustling for awhile can smell your naiveté a mile away and will take full advantage while smokescreening with anarchy rhetoric. I say this as a hustler, don't try to bullshit a bullshitter.

If hamilton is cool its because of the people who dont hop around

Tons of squatable land in the rural southwest, for those not irreversibly damaged by urban existence. Meaning, those willing to actually (and quite literally) create their own lives rather than working for others to get the money to pay others to create it for you. not all that easy, but entirely doable for those with the desire, creativity and motivation. I've done it for over 10 years now.

Btw, fuck community (in the sense most use the term).

Sounds like a good way to get rid of most of the evermore suspicious anarchops preying around the scene... or being THE scene. And also getting rid of that scene altogether. The non-humans make the best, healthiest scene you can ever imagine.

sorry I meant "anarcops", not "chops".

pork chops?

porky anarchops, right... chop chop chop.

Mountain Man-ing requires taking hobo-ing to the next level, you'll need an axe, shovel and knife basically, and a few other survival skills which Zerzan has no idea about. Mountain Girls will have to leave all their make-up and perfumes behind, they attract some nasty critters like bears, and forget about it if you have a fucked-up Christian sentiment like lions and lambs can exist together in the same environment if they have faith, nature ain't like that! If you're REALLY going into the deeper wild, you may want to think about a firearm 30 calibre or larger.

i have needed more than an axe, shovel and knife in order to create MY life. bowsaw, hammer, eventually even 18 volt hand drill and circular saw, charged up with solar. and a chainsaw really helps if you need wood for heating and/or building. i am no primitivist, nor do i have a dogmatic aversion to technology that already exists and i find appropriate for my life. shit, i drive a small pickup truck.

my point was that places do exist for those with the desire and skills (including the ability to learn such skills by doing shit) to live relatively free of mass society. but it takes a desire/willingness to let go of a lot of assumptions about what it means to live a free, comfortable life. i have priorized my own autonomy over material comforts, although my life is in fact quite comfortable for me. i even get online sometimes!

and yes, having weapons for various possible situations is a must. but unless one is hunting, the only thing i keep a gun around for is the inevitable encroachment of human shitheads.

My list was basic Mountain-Man 101, but yeah, hey, I moved up to alpha-dog Mountain-Man with a welder, 24 inch chainsaw, dirt-bike, log-cabin, hot-shower, internet, pick-up truck, refrigeration, weaponry, mountain-woman, hell, mountain-family, sheesh, that's why I dropped out and became a nihilist hobo,,,,,,,

Stupid lame civilizationnists and their gasoline obsession... Not that hard to cut a tree with a bowsaw. Also much lesser dangerous and way less maintenance. Helluvah fun thing to see you running like crazy in the forest with your face half opened coz that chain blade went off unexpedtedly...

It's about the availability of places, it's about the social arrangement you desire. If someone's okay doing it on their own, that's fine, as long as you don't come back to us 1-2 years later complaining about the loneliness or lack of fuck.

Helluva lotta fun watching 10 thugs running the fuck away from me as I run towards them with a high revving chainsaw dude.

You can get a lot more bloody fun out of a big can of pepper spray and a machete Vs 10 crack heads.

Yeah all talk, I'm actually at the level of projecting an aura of gleeful nothingness and cheerful meaninglessness and therefore have no need of weapons because I fear nothing because I attract nothing nasty.

But we're opposites.You live life like the beautiful people at the start of LA La Land in the freeway traffic jam, except I'm UNDER the freeway overpass dressed in dirty cum and ketchup stained denim jeans and T-shirt breaking spontaneously into song and dance routines around all the broken and crack-addicted wrecks of the capitalist system,,,,,

All the [other] broken and crackalackin' wrecks ...

FTFY

You're right though about gasoline dependency, and factored into the availability of spaces to live and fulfilling ones desires, 'not working' is not an option. Is not the hobo lifestyle merely a rejection and inversion of the credit rating values which dominate mainstream Western culture? Is not avoiding wage-slavery a denial of social intercourse, reminiscent of the monastic lifestyle enjoyed by priests and other social misfits?

That part you seem to ignore is that monastic orders are a the grassroots of the post-Roman European civilization, that was far less despotic and more interesting than your high school books make it to be. Nott saying that capitalism and its civilization was a great idea but without the "burgs" (or "bourgs") centered on monasteries as faith-driven factory-towns you wouln't have had the development of a capitalist industry, democratic institutions and alphabetization of the peasants. The Buddhist and Taoist monasteries have played an equally central role in the Far East societies.

So to say... monasticism can be a great engine to create a new world, just that it doesn't have to be around profiting from the myths created by some enlightened elite.

Thanks hahaha. You're new here aren't you? Sorry,,,,,It was my only way to penetrate your supercilious and dualistic attitude to the downtrodden masses. You see, I am the spokesperson for the East Coast Nihilo-Anarcho-Hobo chapter........Oh, and thanks for the text-book Early-Christian and Eastern religious History and the birth of the capitalist State 101 lesson, but I've been through the simplistic Marxist stage of critiqueing modern culture, and it just doesn't cut it anymore, like steam-powered chainsaws, they don't work, but gasoline ones do, get over it.

"not that hard to cut a tree with a bowsaw"

small trees, for sure, i've cut hundreds with hand tools (bowsaws, axes, 2-person hand chains, etc). but when you start getting close to 60 years old, cutting a 32" tree with a bowsaw starts to look very different than it did when i was 40. and when you not only have to cut it down but then cut it to size to fit into a small wood stove (30-40 cuts, plus splitting), the effort is increased almost exponentially. youth... it is wasted on the young.

i actually know of more accidents with hand tools than with power tools (folks that know how to use power tools are careful, many folks that use hand tools are careless as shit). i do know a guy who lost his arm using a chainsaw with one hand up in a tree - but that is some stupid shit to be doing, imo.

get off your high horse, cut trees however the fuck you want, and stop judging others with your neo-primitivist bullshit.

Totally concur with you concerning hardwoods, and using a woodburner for heating, haha, using bowsaw cut soft-wood would require a conveyor-belt to keep the wood up to it, or a slave to feed it. This is where the primitist theory cracks and falters because its mostly armchair dreamers who've never ventured beyond the picnic bench at the local park.

The catch 22 for those who acknowledge the reality of epigenetics and pleomorphism but who are put down as 'quacks' by science and rationality is noun-and-verb (scientific) language-and-grammar. That is, in the modern physics view, while the transforming relational medium/plenum is in a natural primacy over the relational forms that are continually gathering and regathering within it, language conveys a fixed, persisting identity to the continually transforming relational forms by assigning an unchanging name label. If we see the form in earlier and later phases of the transforming relational medium, it can't be the 'same form' (one can't step into the same river twice) but science SEMANTICALLY imposes fixed identity on it, which directly conflicts with the nonduality of relational form and transforming relational medium [epigenetic-genetic nonduality]. The semantic fixed identity of the form forces us to explain change, NOT as transforming relations within the fluid (relational) medium, but in terms of 'time', a kind of updating step-function that applies to everywhere-at-the-same time [the entire universe... but not really, only in our internal conceptualizing]). As time changes, the persisting identity forms are each updated. A world of things-in-themselves with persisting identities that update over 'time' [the science and rationality view] is in innate contradiction to the world understood as a transforming relational (spacetime) continuum where "relations are in a natural primacy over things"

Any one of us can be a 'no Gods, no masters, no stereotypes' rebel-at-the-ready [no need to make it a sole profession] whose actions are situationally (inductively) actualized in the service of restoring balance and harmony. Such an individual does not need to develop a set of moral and ethical rules that he must consult in every situation and crank through them, rationally, to come up with an intention-driven plan of action. Such an individual does not need membership in any group that believes in stereotyping themselves on the basis of their common properties and common set of moral and ethical rules that explain where their actions are coming from. Their actions are not coming from some internal rational analysis, their actions are inductively actualized by the relational situations they find themselves in as captured in nonduality wherein: "epigenetic influence inductively actualizes genetic expression".

Such an outlook depends on the reification of activities into 'things-in-themselves', fixed forms which are either 'good' or 'bad'. Anarchists [good] will be stereotyped by way of having 'common properties' which differ from non-anarchists [bad] and the long project of purification will ensure, by way of rewarding/fertilizing the proliferation of anarchists and punishing/starving the proliferation of non-anarchists.

Purification can be done more easily in one location where everyone can keep an eye on everyone else, keeping a watch out for non-anarchist infiltrators etc. Committees can be formed such as the House Committee on Unanarchist Activities.

If a group of people find themselves together and let the diverse relational-situations that unfold inductively actualize their actions without having to rationally consult with a list of common properties, values and ethics that stereotype who they are, they may well be 'indigenous anarchists'. However, if they are forever carrying around with them some list of moral and ethical rules that they must apply to each 'situation' they find themselves in, so that they must analyze the situation, reconcile it with their values, and then act in a 'rational' and 'deliberate' fashion, ... this is not 'indigenous anarchism', but it is the Western way.

The definition of 'anarchism' in the case of indigenous anarchism pivots from the relative priority given to situational influence that [outside-inwardly] inductively actualizes one's actions, ... or rational-intention that [inside-outwardly] drives one's actions; i.e. indigenous anarchist is where situational inductive influence is in a natural precedence over rational intention drive as the animator of action.

Even if it is situational influence that inductively actualizes the actions of an individual within a relational social dynamic, noun-and-verb language-and-grammar reduces the description of these situation-induced activities to terms of 'independent things-in-themselves' and 'what these things do'.

This is why science has such a powerful hold in our culture [i.e. because our culture is shaped by our use of noun-and-verb Indo-European/scientific language-and-grammar]. And yes, I am still talking about 'anarchism' and how rationality biases our understanding of it.

What is implied above is that 'epigenesis' (situational inductive influence) is in a natural precedence over 'genesis' (inside-outwards asserting drive) as the animating source of action. This is like saying that Lamarckism is in a natural precedence over Darwinism, or, it is like saying, as Bohm says;

“Space is not empty. It is full, a plenum as opposed to a vacuum and is the ground for the existence of everything, including ourselves.” — David Bohm

or, what Schroedinger is saying;

“What we observe as material bodies and forces are nothing but shapes and variations in the structure of space. Particles are just schaumkommen (appearances).” – Erwin Schroedinger

If one (as a typical primarcy-of rationality indoctrinated Westerner) 'try this on', you can see that 'epigenetics' and 'pleomorphism' which are deemed 'quackery' by orthodox science, are not only NOT quackery, but the primary physical reality, it may then become clear that Whorf is on target with his claim that 'science' (newtonian) and rationality derive from noun-and-verb language (thing-based RE-presentations of the world dynamic). monomorphism which divides up biota into 'pathogens' and 'good cells' sets the stage the same binary moral judgement at the level of organisms, hence, 'rebels' (aka 'terrorists') are seen as pathogenic organisms that attack 'good organisms' and are the source of 'disease' in organismic society. epigenetics and pleomorphism suggest, on the other hand, that both 'good' and 'bad' forms are genetic expressions coming from a common plenum, inductively actualized by epigenetic influence. the 'terrorist forms' or 'rebel forms' are 'agents of transformation' (as arise naturally in an anarchist environment which are inductively actualized BY IMBALANCE AND DISHARMONY in the service of restoring balance and harmony.

Quackery is an epithet applied by science and rationality to epigenetics and pleomorphism. Quackery has also been applied to anarchism, the suggestion that human society can function as a free relational dynamic and DOES NOT HAVE TO function on the basis of 'intentions' that work on the present to hammer out the (desired) future.

Are terrorists bred from terrorists? Or should we acknowledge epigenetic inductive influence [the abusive and humiliating influence of colonization] and pleomorphism where the forming of 'good' and 'pathogenic' social units comes from a common medium? i.e. is 'radicalizing' an outside-inward (epigenetic) inductive influence coming from relational discrimination or an inside-outward (genetic) drive like the hatching of implanted seeds of evil? Let's ask our black brothers/sisters. It is easy for colonizers to use rational thinking to claim that 'genetic expression' is all there is [no epigenetics] thanks to science conceiving of space as an empty Euclidian void independent of the then-correspondingly 'independent' things residing within it, thereby removing the colonizers entirely from any/all responsibility for the emergence/growth of rebel activity.

once one invests the transformative power of anarchism in a thing-in-itself called an 'anarchist' [the Nietzschean 'double error of grammar'], the whole ball game regresses to the Western scientific and rational way, where anarchism becomes a Darwinian dynasty aiming to proliferate and fill the world with anarchists. It is another Anarchist Genesis 1:28.

Indigenous anarchism is, by contrast, UNREIFIED, it is a relational ethic that keys to the unfolding relational situation rather than a list of politically correct behaviours which the possesser (anarchist-thing-in-itself) is dutifully bound to adhere to. The nondual assumption of indigenous anarchism assumes [correctly, according to modern physics] that we are all included in a dynamic UNUUM or PLENUM, a transforming relational continuum, wherein there is an inherent INTERDEPENDENCE [everything is influencing everything].

Open the pod bay doors emile

Oh no... I haven't been on this site in years, and I come back and y'all are still talking about the "scene." Stop isolating yourself and trying to create an anarchist "scene" (whatever the hell that means to you), and you will go much farther in creating anarchy.

I realize you're upset that some cities on the coasts aren't the anarchist playgrounds you or others remember them to be, but honestly, our movement is doing better now than it was about a decade ago or so when our practice was largely a circle of "do illegal things then do jail/prisoner support".

No it's not. The movement is dead.

It is now a bunch of movements: Activists and union people, of course. Party hacks, why not? Then you got good old anti-fascism, that's antifa, for the uninformed. After that you have your co ops, your protesters, you know, the people that don't do anything but protest. So nutty, they should be a candy bar! After that you have your kill 'em all extremists and your hut builders and cow milkers, tree sitters, arsonists and monkeywrenchers.

Still more? You bet I could go on, but who isn't included? Sad little Anews. Everyone thinks they are the big meanies, a bunch of old nerds ruining the party for the young, hip kids that like gender neutral sex parties where they tell each other "It's going down". IGD shows their Trot influences by taking over everything built by other people and calling it their own. Who needs intelligence when you have propaganda! Hostile posturing and instigating a war with stupid right wing thugs is the best way to make people feel like your narrative is the truthiest! What a good idea on psychologically manipulating people!

Yours truly, unity in fear,

Emile's Sexbot

more people are losing their belief/trust in politics and politicians.

more people are losing their belief/trust in the 'popular truths' (we are entering the post-truth era)

more people are believing that all news is 'fake news' even the news that checks the facts [the fact that an anarchist smashed some windows is meaningless, ... because 'facts' are out of the context wherein the social system is controlling the living space and preventing a person from 'having a life' wherein he can give expression to his creative potentials other than in a corporate gerbil-cage, ... while 'his own government' ("of all people") holds him down and cheerleaders his being gang-raped].

more people are seeing that politicians are no longer promising utopia (except for a minority of throwbacks like trump) but are instead promising to save you from a really, really terrible disaster, ... so terrible that leaders should be celebrated for the miserable times you are having because, without good leadership, things would be so, so much worse, believe me (trump is visibly, while we speak, resetting goals and objectives from the promise of utopian greatness to avoidance of total degeneration/Armageddon).

* * *

point is, social transformation is going on bigtime in this post-truth, fake-news, sky-is-falling era and radicalization doesn't necessarily mean joining a religious extremist group..

science and rationality are still bragging what a great job they are doing and how matters would be so much worse without them; e.g. there would be complete anarchy without the antidote (sic) of science and rationality. meanwhile, science and rationality having grown, amplified and leveraged their influence through global scientific and rational society, are engendering more unanticipated and unaddressed externalities than ever before, because, science and rationality are based on over simplist being-based logical propositions like; "Saddam and Qaddafy are causing unwanted results; ... by eliminating them, we can eliminate the unwanted results they are causing'. How stupid can science and rationality be? The name labels we put on things do not refer to physically real things, ask Miguel de Cervantes. Science and rationality have us tilting at windmills and engendering massive 'externalities' because the world we are intervening in is relationally complex in the extreme [far beyond the simple being-based logical propositions of science and rationality].

Instead of anarchists trying to put together some critical mass of available anarchist bodies in some local milieu and expecting things to go hypercritical from there, reception committees should be formed anywhere, everywhere, to welcome the hordes of people whose disillusionment index has risen to the point where they are ready to talk serious reform, not just of 'what't out there' but of 'what's in here' [the old assumptions such as the (unnatural) belief in the primacy of rationality over experience-based intuition].

all of this transformation of how we view things is going on for sure, but it is not directly visible.

all of this transformation of how we view things is going on for sure, but it is not directly visible.

Instead of anarchists trying to put together some critical mass of available anarchist bodies in some local milieu and expecting things to go hypercritical from there, reception committees should be formed anywhere, everywhere, to welcome the hordes of people whose disillusionment index has risen to the point where they are ready to talk serious reform, not just of 'what't out there' but of 'what's in here' [the old assumptions such as the (unnatural) belief in the primacy of rationality over experience-based intuition].

point is, social transformation is going on bigtime in this post-truth, fake-news, sky-is-falling era and radicalization doesn't necessarily mean joining a religious extremist group..

science and rationality are still bragging what a great job they are doing and how matters would be so much worse without them; e.g. there would be complete anarchy without the antidote (sic) of science and rationality. meanwhile, science and rationality having grown, amplified and leveraged their influence through global scientific and rational society, are engendering more unanticipated and unaddressed externalities than ever before, because, science and rationality are based on over simplist being-based logical propositions like; "Saddam and Qaddafy are causing unwanted results; ... by eliminating them, we can eliminate the unwanted results they are causing'. How stupid can science and rationality be? The name labels we put on things do not refer to physically real things, ask Miguel de Cervantes. Science and rationality have us tilting at windmills and engendering massive 'externalities' because the world we are intervening in is relationally complex in the extreme [far beyond the simple being-based logical propositions of science and rationality].

more people are seeing that politicians are no longer promising utopia (except for a minority of throwbacks like trump) but are instead promising to save you from a really, really terrible disaster, ... so terrible that leaders should be celebrated for the miserable times you are having because, without good leadership, things would be so, so much worse, believe me (trump is visibly, while we speak, resetting goals and objectives from the promise of utopian greatness to avoidance of total degeneration/Armageddon).

* * *

more people are believing that all news is 'fake news' even the news that checks the facts [the fact that an anarchist smashed some windows is meaningless, ... because 'facts' are out of the context wherein the social system is controlling the living space and preventing a person from 'having a life' wherein he can give expression to his creative potentials other than in a corporate gerbil-cage, ... while 'his own government' ("of all people") holds him down and cheerleaders his being gang-raped].

more people are losing their belief/trust in politics and politicians.

more people are losing their belief/trust in the 'popular truths' (we are entering the post-truth era)

You 2 should get together more often, read as a continuation/collaboration makes the whole text quite accessible.

Where the fuck have you guys been? The scene/movement/milieu has been dead. Sorry that you've been living in a diminishing bubble in the Bay Area. There's nowhere to go. It's over. Max out your credit (student loans or otherwise) and stash as much as you can. We're going to see stagnation in the West/North America for a long fucking time. Quit waiting and hoping. There's literally no point to produce, sprint or spread anarchist propaganda or ideology. The only info worthwhile spreading is on how to exploit every remaining crack in the system. Abandon ship and save who/what you can.

I haven't got much trouble believing the moment's gone... I look at the local anarchists and realize how there's no longer a need for more police surveillance, as they behave like cops themselves, or maybe they bluntly are. Some dudes and dudettes from the "radical" milieu have oddly been following me around at very precise times and locations when my cell phone had its battery connected. This was so obvious it's eerie. These are well-respected folks, well-known in the crowd, locally and more globally. They're the IGD crowd. They're the Submedia crowd. Perbably even the Crimethinc crowd. They've been into windows-smashing and other vandalism, yet when they are NEVER around when it's about creating anything practical that departsm breaks away from the dominant system. They are for breaking a few unimportant things that will easily be repaired, but not about breaking the social relationship.

The ordinary people are winning. Just look around ya. The proles have subverted their own past attempts at Revoliution, and are now working for the Beast, and doing it with hype and pride. Then just like in 1984, as the generations succeed each other, people will have worsering conditions while believing hardcore they're the happiest and freeiest and goodest as they can ever be. They are like in Brave New World, diving head-first into the abyss as they're chasing their much-desired candies. Fashions and trends will keep going in circles, hipsters gonna shake hips, fuckers gonna dance, technology's gonna keep scoring badly against humans, and we might potentially indeed end up living in some toxic wasteland, with lifeless oceans.

The best scenario for the future through such society would be for mankind to be put uner the control of a far superior AI, so that the wild life can be allowed to revive and homo sapiens sapiens be kept fro doing more damage to the planet. Because franky humans cannot manage their own shit with anything that resembles wisdom, mercy, goodness. That's what the other animals do, not us.

Society is hopeless. The anarcho-left are reactionary traitors to even be trying to give us hope in changing it. Let's flee or attack it as a whole, not through one of its most controversial aspects.

Pig violence? Gentrification? Rape culture? Racism? Poor being evicted? More prisons? THIS IS SOCIETY, you fucks! That's the dominant world of domination. It keeps happening because people keep working and functionning within its many routines. The more you try making it better the more it gets violently worse.

More importantly... THE SYSTEM WORKS BECAUSE YOU WORK.

Dementia and its paranoid ramblings are one hell of a drug!

Paranoia maybe... but where's dementia?

Long rambling stories that don't go anywhere, like that time I had an onion on my belt, as was the style at the time!

"THE SYSTEM WORKS BECAUSE YOU WORK."

Agreed. Stop working, however you can. Scam as much as possible, not as a statement but for survival. To breathe. To annihilate the nothingness.

One can still work for the system but not relate or identify with it. This INNER-human strike would liberate the unique creative nothing of the individual regardless of the externalizations.

that's still called working for the system. your words not mine.

The system needs both.

Nooo, one is actually working for oneself and only going through the motions of working for the system. Ever done mindless repetitive process work and lasted more than 6 months at the same conveyor belt? There is a trance state one can attain whilst still doing the work. This time is YOUR time, and you're getting paid for it, you are being sustained and fed by a corporation. I used to compose poetry and music while I did this work, the creative nothing was accessible, work became play.

I saw a business the other day called Revolution Realty. Tagline: "Join the Movement."

No perspective for real world social struggles against what made the Bay Area or NYC unaffordable. Chickenshit politically worthless anarchist subculture duds, unite!

" politically worthless"

yep, that's me. and fucking proud of it! FUCK POLITICS!!!! and everyone that values it!

yeah, instead of hanging out in our subcultural ghetto why aren't we hanging UP boring text-heavy posters and planning failed transit strikes with THE PEOPLE instead?

Kevin, you should rock me like Amadeus

Well.... The poor are being pushed​ to the older suburbs, so i expect infoshops and anarchists to show up there any minute now.

The older suburbs are an extension of the senior citizens welfare State. When they're too fucked mentally and physically to livee on their own you'll be having endless old suburbs shut down. But who wants to live in fucking suburbs anyways? They'll be ruins of a world gone really wrong.

Car-based, oil-driven, money-fueled

Nowhere, that's where!

Look at all the sense of futility on display here!

All these rationalizations for living in the woods by yourself, not that I blame you, but that doesn't fit my definition of anarchy. In a few decades, I'll go in to the woods to die too but I wouldn't want to resign myself to a stagnant routine until I've only got a decade or 2 left on earth.

Certain types of resistance only become possible with a certain population density or a critical mass of people responding to significant historical events.

Meanwhile, there's plenty of organizing work worth doing but everyone's a fucking nihilist/egoist these days so all they can do is practice their clever-sounding quips and laugh at anyone who's foolish enough to be sincere.

Maybe doing bong-rips of your own farts doesn't lead anywhere interesting? Could it be that simple? Everything being dismissed as "leftist moralizing" these days was the source of the conflict that you secretly crave?

it's not because they ain't following you anymore on your activist platforms that it makes them "nihilist/egoists". There's also nothing problematic with egoism. You'd just need to talk more deeply about where your true intentions are at. Or just attack, or do whatever your own shit is. Then if others don't pick up on it NOW you can tell us how apathetic they are.

Typical. I'm an "activist platformism" huh? You base that one what exactly?

Apparently I can't even type, let alone platform.
But anyway no. Not an activist, no platforms. You're just strawmanning everyone who's bored by egoism. It's played out, nobody cares what your desires are.

Maybe there's something you're choosing not to see if we all feel that futile about anarchism or the "movement"?

Oh I see just fine. Perspective is guided by your influences, writers, thinkers, media etc. I don't think several of the currents of anarchy represented by this site are good for much except cultivating that sense of futility. This is my point, why are so many frequenters of this site possessed by a sense of futility?

"...places to go for anarchism in North America."

Not, where and how do people who like to call themselves anarchists contribute to real resistance, in the real world, among real people, but where do sheepish subculture stinkers go to get their subcultural identity needs satisfied.

As always, there are not enough bad things to say about the subcultural stinkers phenomena that gets called anarchism in the US from an authentic anti-capitalist and anti-statist viewpoint.

Seeing as you are resisting an idea and a belief nothing physically tangible. Get over it.

If that actually is Kevin, I think it's safe to say he's never getting over it dude

It comes directly from the very "culture" (body-haters) that you so loudly claim to oppose.

I'd be laughing at you, if you weren't so fucking sad.

"where do sheepish subculture stinkers go to get their subcultural identity needs satisfied."

All the way Skatopia of course! Home of all the elite punk rock sk8er commodity subculture, owned and run by supermacho authoritarians like BREH-UH-HEWCE Martin!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GNYWdMCcOck

Yee. Haw.

Is Kevin the only person who thinks that the anarchist scene is a worthless pile of crap?

"I'd be laughing at you, if you weren't so fucking sad."

And I'd be laughing at you, but you aren't worth the calorie-burning involved, and first I'd have to take the clothes-pin off my nose.

Keating is the only one who attacks other people for the way they smell.

It is one of his obsessions. Maybe he should have worked as a PR shill for a deodorant manufacturer.

But detecting Keating by the content and tone of his posts in very very easy. Years go by and he is still using the same lame insults, the same stale rhetoric, the same unclicked links to the same worn-out articles he once posted to infoshop.

But Kevin answers it with worthless class war ridden leftist struggle nonsense.

Divide and conquer Illuminati MKULTRA hegelian dialectics false dichotomies brah... all engineered by George Soros and the Trilateral n shit, wake up.

Goin back to Abovetopsecret....

Didn't Yuppie Eradication fail? I mean, isn't that the point of this TOTW? Also it feels nice to be posting in a Keating thread.

Lol what if Keating was right all along and you douchebags didn't give respect to the man who could've fought off the yuppies and freed the Bay Area from Yuppie colonization? #deepthoughts #postinginakeatingthread

He's certainly right about class being one of the lines of tension that should be focused on, but besides that he's an insufferable contrarian with a lot of red flags for mental illness. You know, an anarchist?

At all. Leave that to the left and marxtards.

As usual ziggy, you fail to phrase that as an opinion. Not to mention other phrasing like a 4chan neckbeard little douche. Class is one of the major lines of tension until capitalism ceases to exist, regardless of whether you can admit it.

It's riddled with resentment is what it is and it has nothing to do with anarchy. Status and belief in it is the problem. Get to the heart of THAT matter and quite mistaking branches(class) for roots.

Usually not a fan of SE's foul mouthed comments, but the world has changed since 100 years ago, and the capitalists no longer are only a bunch of robber barons in tuxedoes. Okay, you might have some (upper prole) hipster reenactments in some bougie clubs in your city, but that's still just silly dumb spectacle.

No... what you fail to consider is how capitalism is a game mostly everyone is taking part into, and the myth of upward mobility, its induced dreams (sometimes reified) of a higher, more privileged social status, are pervasive all over the place, including your anarcho Left milieu.

I'm curious... Are you one of those who're against specific forms of gentrification, while not addressing the gentrification senselessly pushed forward by your Friends?

I'm curious ... how any of you fools can have to use money ever, at all, and then deny that class is still extremely relevant, although of course the dynamics have changed in a century. I certainly haven't failed to consider my own extreme poverty. The game wasn't admitting new players at all for the last 10 years of my life. It depends on the local context and part of that equation is class.

But really, you don't actually know anything about me but like to speak as if you do because of this weird format. I'm just every leftist ever, right?

People that are existentially honest with themselves know this. As far as the game is concerned ALL from top to bottom bottom to top who play it are implicated from the billionaires of Bohemian Grove to the lottery ticket buying prole.

Class has tertiary relevance at most but the root problem remains status and the belief in it. The resulting game REQUIRES losers on some level. I happen to be one of them as well just so you know.

According to you, if we just shift our thinking, magically, the few thousand people who exercise almost total economic control over the rest of us are somehow neutralized. This must presumably extended to their networks of spies, their vast armies and their ability to exert more subtle control over almost every other aspect of capitalist society. But it's all just a "state of mind maaaan" … you fucking hippy halfwit.

Away from Leviathanic, historical, civilized logic. If there was those marginal elements of power that you mention would dissipate simply from lack of initiated belief to enforce.

Right. All tyranny and it's mechanisms will simply vanish if you find a genie and wish them away. Sad little hippy with your deluded nonsense but please, continue lecturing about how class is an illusion. What was it? A shitty call centre job? Living in a fantasy world must be how you cope.

but keep believing in your spooky power that has a perennial existence beyond belief and behavior.

Did you miss the recent news about Alex Jones' ex-wife talking about how he's at best, a performance artist or more accurately, a fake news demagogue? Aren't you embarrassed to reference "bohemian grove"?

The conspiracy angle to it is false but there is an actual group.

Furthermore you do realize I'm throwing water on the idea that a billionaire cabal runs the world right. Corporeal belief and behavior coming first and all that.

Not Alex Jones' Eyes-Wide-Shut type of paranoid fantasy about billionaire cabals, no, or at least what they do for fun isn't really the point. What you can make large groups of people do when you have access to enough wealth and influence is real enough to outlast your little opinions on the subject. The pieces on the chess board will continue to move long after your bones are dust so it seems silly to die insisting that they're not "real". They're real enough.

But they are not the base of their own existence by any means. To see that you simply have to observe everyday people and what they believe. What goes on after my death is the language, behavior and belief of wealth not the wealthy themselves.

I guess the entire East side of NA has been lost, not only to developpers but as well to the phony anarcho resisters who only maintain utopian country communes for their private circles of privileged liberals (or are they still at this point?). So the hope for a radical relocation would lie in the Midwest/lower Great Lakes and the upper West Coast?

Northern New England and the kanadian Atlantic are still awesome regions full of possibilities but who the fuck wants to go on the distance for living around there.

Anyways just phone me when somebody starts an anarchic commune in some nice spot in the dead angle of the liberals, cops and capitalists alike.

Or let's just take over Rapa Nui, in respect (and defense) of the little native culture that's left there.

No-"where" on stolen land??
Please come visit BC soon!

Colonizing B.C. is only kewl when you're some teenage/early 20s crusty who'll sleep with anyone and work in insane conditions just for weed... or if you're one of their shitty providers of cheap drugs in their 40s.

OMGGGG!!! Where! Its HOW! Howl that out night owl of my nihilist soul ouch! Left and right are gone and so they should be, archaic mindsets that hijacked the infantile innocence of idealism. Not that naive idealism of infancy should not mature to a pragmatic/cognitive equilibrium, integrated psychological/emotional/relational/economic individual utopias,,,,,,,,,where you say? In our own consciousness, how?,,,,with meditation and empathy learned in the schools, not boring repititions of corrupt historical grand narratives. That's all, me go now, I'm an anartist individualist nihilist, bye,,,,,,,,

so, it seems the overall conclusion is...there are no more anarchist scenes? i got off the traveling circuit years ago. who are all the antifas then??? don't tell me anarchy is down to shitty websites full of egoists

lol... anarchy is practice and sensitivities. Can also be defined as a culture of refusal of the dominant social order. It can exist all over the place without requiring some stupid, self-absorbed, easily-manageable "scene" or even milieu. Do we need a main line that bad? Or maybe all twe'd need are open spaces and moments to meet up and conserve without fear of being targeted and slandered by the milieu politicians...

How about believing in others and yourself for a change, instead of always thinking they're some kind of monsters, losers, crazies or whatev?

i really don't get your questions here. im just saying literally are there not towns with infoshops and stuff? believe me im not sorry to have seen the anarchist "movement" i used to know go, either. not because i think anyone is a monster, but because it was dumb. i did come across some ideas, events, and people in those spaces that became really influential to me though.

"are there not towns with infoshops and stuff?"

There are still in some big cities, yes. But many of those aren't contributing much to anarchic activity or relations. Camas Books in Victoria and Spartakus Books in Vancouver (I think it's been closed now) were crowded with the typical liberal Lefties. Dunno what happened with Blood Alley infoshop yet it seemed an okay spot on the other hand.

DIRA in Montreal is quite bas been quite a boring library with a crowd of borderline reformist, institutionalized anarcho-lefties policing it, while Déferle has been over the fence since the start gathering tons of different people, a kind of little "big tent"... when it's been open.

That infoshop in Winnipeg was kinda alright when I hanged out there, years ago, being more a meetup space than anything else. Felt more dynamic and active than most places. Just like Tower in Hamilton who've been doing quite good shit...

US seems more scarce on the infoshop aspect, yet as I'm trying to say here, an infoshop isn't necessarily good news for anarchy. If run by social anarchists you're pretty sure to have one wasted, irrelevant space. So it's all up to the people running it.

I totally agree about your last point. It's all about what you put in to it (or not).

Blood Alley just got seized by the Housing Ministry but TBH, after they closed the shelter upstairs, the industrious folks with addictions ripped out all the pipes for scrap metal and it flooded the space. Or maybe it was somebody who didn't like us but probably just a scrap metal scheme. Thats on top of the pre-existing mould and pepper-spray contamination problems.

It was good little ride for 3 years. Sometimes people did interesting stuff with the space, sometimes it just sat there. Sometimes it functioned as emergency housing or a punk crash pad, sometimes it was frustrating or awesome. Mainly it was rent free!

Oh I forgot the rat shit. No small amount of that.

Wow... So basically you almost achieved having a real anarcho squat in Van. I thought this was just some book store, but... I'm sincerely amazed.

living in today's society is a crazy-maker. as R.D. Laing and others have pointed out, folks like us (the culture of refusal of the dominant social order) are in a double bind since our own families and circles of friends that we were raised in, tend to be supporters of the dominant social order, and our authentic selves are insisting that we must refuse to be herd pulled down that dysfunctional path.

if we 'are true to' our authentic selves, this may mean the loss of love from family and friends who can't bring themselves to leave the dominant social order. if we can't bring ourselves to risk the loss of love, we will betray our authentic self.

i would like to think that 'anarchists' are people who support one another in paying the price of losing the love of family and friends who can't or won't break their commitment to the dominant social order.

this mutual support can be offered at any location but if a move to a new location is in the cards, it should be on the basis of being better able to offer mutual support. the notion of amassing in one place to launch some movement to construct a desired future is the scientific/rational bullshit that the dominant social order is hung up on. it is delusion.

smith center blows! kansas is a nightmare! Cleveland yall, come to Cleveland!

"Can also be defined as a culture of refusal of the dominant social order." Yeah, right. Let me get my Mister Spock ears, toy phaser and Starfleet uniform costume.

How 'bout, can be defined as a subculture within consumer society, and wholly harmless to consumer societ, like any other self-involved subculture?
I'm a drop-out culture dud, and I need a safe space for my fantasy projections.

The moment you realize it was your mother that gave birth to you and not some Daddy State archetype you'll maybe grow a brain, you filthy dog.

This thread is very interesting.

Subcultures duds, unite!

yes, "sucultures duds" (LOL at bad grammar) -- unite under your leader, the one and only KEVIN KEATING.

Hallelujah!

Wait... is this guy still active in the scene or did he managed to get a decent life outside of it, where he ain't eternally made fun of? Now teaching English in China hopefully?

He doesn't go tot the San Francisco anarchist bookfair anymore -- ran out of clothespins for his nose!

What you say is true. He now shills for a deodorant company. And the irony? He claims he is an anti-commodity and anti-consumer culture revolutionary. Yes!!!! A revolutionary new product that allows you not to smell your own stink and focus on those of others. Bloody brilliant, that.

...and said deodorant is widly famous what do you do? Point the finger at the individual (cos it's so easy and everyone likes to have a village idiot), or instead assume collective responsibility for all the passive-agressive stupidity and hypocrisy?

....and *if* said...

. . . but not the blame for the laughingstock known the world over as Mr. Kevin Keating, the man who smells every stink but his own.

"the man who smells every stink but his own"

"But who the fuck does!? Blameth not upon others what thou not wilth blameth onto... aw fuck you get the point."

- Jesus F. Christ

IGTT 0/10

-5/10

I think its called, hot water and soap, loser.

Holy shit...

All I know is that this thread makes me both smell and taste buttstank. Please stop reminding everyone of unwashed ass simmered in a computer chair for 12 hours, cracked open upon arrival of your entrance in the space. Sweaty palms and greasey hair meet food is speckled clothing. Besides the smell of fucked butthole, 2 day old yogurt rot smell hits your nose. That's when you notice the horror: dust. Dust everywhere! On everything, your eyes fart back and forth, so much dust, so hard to breath in the foul smells of this room.

I think Keating's point is that it is the terminally disengaged US anarchist subculture that stinks, rather than any particular individual in the subculture.

Only he is pretending that it's not him, but someone else.

But of course no one is fooled.

The irony of anarchists bemoaning a lack of organizational heirarchy and temporal continuity in their "scene" is simply delicious.

Add new comment

Filtered HTML

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

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
To prevent automated spam submissions leave this field empty.
CAPTCHA
Human?
y
D
f
L
1
H
m
Enter the code without spaces.