Strong relationships are built on good communication. While the anarchist diaspora is not synonymous with insurrectionary culture its influence is felt clearly among any publicly self-identified parties. Regardless of lifestyle we, as anarchists, carry a certain weight among us. To evade this association is to ignore our edge as innovators. However, the deeper our connection with our anarchist principles the less relatable we become to those unfamiliar with the Beautiful Idea.
As people who occupy marginal social spaces, we often find ourselves interacting with or part of other, often not political (or not necessarily political) subcultures. One of the most obvious examples would be punk and its long history with anarchy, but would also include media fandoms, furries, gaming circles, and others.
I just had an idea over the weekend that, had it been put into practice, would've freaked most anews readers right out. It would have been a fine project, perfectly reasonable, but given the context it would've signaled something entirely opposite from what it intended.
What's your most interesting project that you wish someone would do, or that you'd like to do, but don't have the right situation for? Are you working towards getting the right situation for it, or is it too daunting?
As anarchists, we may often find ourselves in challenging situations. This TOTW takes a looks at the anarchist relationship with natural disasters (hurricanes, tornadoes, blizzards, earthquakes, floods, tsunamis, etc) and other major adverse events like insurrection, war, riots, and general trouble.
Story time everyone! In this case, the story is: how did you become an anarchist?
What was your path to becoming an anarchist? Was it because of the influence of a subculture, like punk, hippie or activism? Was it the influence (positive or negative) of a particular relative or teacher? Was it through long hours reading books in the library? Was it through the influence of a friend or group of friends? Was it through a series of troubles with the law? Or was it through spending excessive amounts of time on the internet?
The concept of constant struggle holds strong as definitive measure among a range of anarchists. We may be struggling against our preexisting conditions--or the level at which we are at odds with what we oppose as anarchists, or intentionally confronting or attacking our opposition in a direct drive towards a intensified state of struggle. This isn't intended to present a binary either, as of course there can be a range of ways we may attack our enemies that make sense in our situation.
Following up on last weeks topic on transhumanism is a simpler question.
Is it in the interest of anarchism for humans to leave and settle upon other planets than earth.
On the pro side is the idea that exploration, while the seed of colonialism, is also the seed of something like freedom. Any place else will not have the institutions and anthropology that this planet does.
Any place else can represent the tabla rosa [edit: tabula rasa] of a fresh start, a blank piece of paper, a new beginning.
The idea of banning people seems to be all the rage these days now that President what's-his-name wants to ban large swaths of people from entering the U.S. Within anarchist circles, however, the idea of banning people from anarchist spaces has long been popular among certain people as well. Some people argue that banning people is perfectly fine and is in alignment with the anarchist principle of free association. Other people say that banning people is not at all okay, saying it is by it's very nature exclusionary and leads to certain people having more influence and power than others.