In every society there have always been those who hopelessly desire to create their own lives. These passionate beings want to live wildly and relish in boundless possibility. The anarchist mantra of "no gods, no masters" embodies this spiritual outlook; for one who chooses life becomes their own master. Those who endeavor to create their existence must find ways that employ strategies unique to their situation. They write their own story. The outlaw accepts that they are an outsider, for once the pandora's box of freedom is opened, one's life cannot be the same.
from https://godsandradicals.org - by Dr. Bones
As of this writing I have been out of my mind on acid bought off the Dark Web for the better part of 24 hours. My house is covered in drawings, still-burning incense, and every mirror appears to be dotted with the words “YOU ARE TAICHI” written in what I presume to be blood. Texts from Stirner are scattered about everywhere and people on twitter are asking me how they can join The Ancient and Medicinal Order of the Hyena.
I once got into an argument at the anarchist study group in Berkeley, CA about where our anarchy came from. As I usually do, I loudly proclaimed that all anarchy means to me is “No!” and nothing else. To some at the group, this seemed an immature and childish sentiment, reminiscent of Crimethinc. and reeking of anti-intellectualism. Some shared their displeasure at this claim of mine, while some sat silently, as they usually do at the study group, being voyeurs, being takers, giving none of their energy or effort and absorbing(or not) the work others do in attempting to explain their thoughts and feelings.
It's said that with the contemporary 'western' socio-political standard – that being some variant of classical or social liberalism – we are freer than ever, wealthier than ever. To be anything beyond a qualified disciple of Fukuyama beyond one's starry-eyed adolescence is to be a tragic idealist, a relic of more naive times. I too am a sceptic of a certain form of idealism. We who consider ourselves philosophers love to fashion our own 'best of all possible worlds'. Indeed, it's been something of a raison d'etre at least since Plato's 'Republic' (with its very own philosopher-king, naturally). But these grand visions are always found wanting. The utopias of our ancestors leave us scratching our heads. We do not need another glorious constitution to dribble from the pen of some genius or other, laying out a life into which we can be slotted, we need the space to build our own lives – unmoulded by the hammer of dogma, unpersuaded by the bloodthirsty crutch of certainty.
After a year of hiatus, Free Radical Radio is returning in a new iteration. We are a group of anarchists, nihilists, label-haters, readers, but above all we find joy and passion in the sharing and discussion of ideas. We intend to use this project as an outlet to share audio recordings we have created that challenged us, interested us, or made us laugh so hard that we cried. There is possibility that podcasts will happen again, but only if we are inspired and driven by our own desires to make them happen.
Announcing underHILL Distro: https://underhilldistro.tumblr.com/
underHILL distro is excited to announce that after three years of existing as a face to face distribution project, we've taken the leap, bit friendship as a form of life & no new ideas' tumblr scheme, put our portfolio online, and removed the human element from the equation.
The following short essay is a response to ‘Stirnerian Hauntology and the Creative Nothing’—a presentation and short discussion by Daniel on the works of early 19th century German thinker Max Stirner at the East Bay Anarchist Book Fair on Dec, 17 2016. The three concerns with the presentation are as follows: §I is a critique of psychological egoism, which is the view that one is already an egoist. §II is a critique of the use of dualist language invoked in the presentation, and its incompatibility with what I’m calling a phenomenological egoism. §III outlines a concern with Daniel’s treatment of empathy as a phenomenon.
The word anarchist has long been used to label various people and movements that often are and have been quite different from each other in their approaches, ideas and goals. People who have called themselves or been described by others as libertarians include individuals as diverse as Bakunin, Warren, Armand, Kropotkin, Michel, Stirner, Goldman, Mackay, Durruti, Arrigoni, Dolgoff, and Rothbard. What made all of these folks anarchists was their opposition to the state, to governments of all kinds. They all believed that the state was a pernicious force which crushed individual freedom and stood in the way of cooperation and mutual aid among equals. But their ideas about how to destroy or circumvent the state and their actions intended to accomplish their goals varied tremendously. Some were individualists who advocated private property, individual autonomy and free exchange, others social anarchists (communists, collectivists and/or syndicalists) who promoted workers’ solidarity, communal action and shared decision-making. Whatever their focus, however, these anarchists all advocated individual liberty side-by-side with voluntary social interactions among free people, with an emphasis on the primacy of one over the other based on temperament, experience, and the myriad other influences that contribute to the way we all form ideas and opinions.