TOTW: Bullshit Jobs and Anarchist Integrity

  • Posted on: 25 September 2017
  • By: thecollective

How does one make a living in this world and still have some kind of integrity as an anarchist? Usually this means handling money, and often that means having a job, and most likely that job is bullshit. But of course, none of this necessarily has to be the case.

Various sub-philosophies within anarchism have been advocated for how to do this, namely Illegalism (stealing for a living), Agorism (black market businesses), Rewilding (hunting & gathering) and Communalism (living & working on communes). But even though these approaches exist, very few anarchists seem to actually practice this. And those who do practice it don't tend to do it for very long or they treat it as a kind of side-hobby to engage in on their free time off of work (i.e., that which really pays the bills).

And then on the other end of the spectrum, there are the ways of making a living that are absolutely off-limits for anarchists. Usually these are considered to be jobs in law enforcement, the military and being a prison guard. Sometimes the sphere of forbidden jobs is expanded to include anything where one is employed by a government or where one is a boss who has the ability to fire & hire other people. But even with that, there are anarchists out there who have those kinds of jobs. So the zone where one can lose one's anarchy card based on one's profession then gets to be a bit murky.

So between these two extremes, pristine revolutionary purity on the one hand and complete hypocritical douchebaggery on the other, how do we navigate life in this world dominated by capitalism and statism, maintain some sense of dignity and integrity as anarchists, and still reliably get food on our tables and keep a roof over our heads? (and once you've figured that out please put in a good job reference for us)

category: 

Comments

If the capitalist economy is the most visible, the loudest, and the most frictional, it's certainly not more than a tiny part of the global economy. There are necessary jobs in protecting the environment from extractivism, producing food at smaller scale than intensive agriculture, or caring for each other. These jobs exist, and they can provide satisfaction and enough money to live.

On the other hand if you want to go for shitty corporate jobs, then you make a choice that you can regret. Feeding the beast might not be your best choice, or at least you can take advantage of your position to sabotage it from inside. This is what works best since you have access to its guts.

In general you want to feed what you want to see growing, not your enemy. Know your enemy, but more importantly, feel what's good for yourself and others.

boy, howdy, anarchists sure like rules and principles. you're the kinda people who think hypocrisy is worse than murder, aren't you?

Certainly your dilemma is strong.

Anarchists probably disagree with each other more than any other theoretical position in history so if you're confused about it, that's normal.

The most common way I've seen for us to keep our integrity is to not care about this and have little to no principals related to our lifestyle.

*principles*

My name is L and I'm from a part of town where clowns get beat down and all you hear are gun shot sounds. On 139 and Lennox Ave. there's a big park and if you're soft? Don't go through it when it gets dark! Cuz at night time... niggas try to tax. They sneakier then alley cats -- that's why I carry gats!

Yo, I'm a motherfuckin' fugitive... buckwild and foul is the lifestyle that I choose to live! Because to me, it's all about a $$BUCK$$. I /used/ to have a partner in crime by the name of Chuck. We'd stalk the city, stickin' shit up and like Frank Nitty we robbed kids and split the dough fiddy-fiddy. Well, one day we stuck a dice game on the Ave and split the cash... then I MURDERED his ass! And took his half! (lol)

Because I'm all about endz and skinz: when you got those you DON'T need no motherfuckin' friendz!

If I catch you on a late night, stacked, you gettin' STUCK, jack! My Moms told me to "get a job", FUCK THAT! (LOL!) Aiyo! Picture ME gettin' a job! Takin' orders from BOB! Sellin' corn on the cob?

Yo, how the hell Imma' make ends meet? Makin' about a 120 dollars a week? Man... I'd rather do another HIT! I want clean clothes, mean hoes and all that other shit! Tho, I admit: I'm a sucka, a low down dirty sneaky connivin' motherfucka. Breakin' in cribs wit a crowbar: I wasn't poor I was PO! (I couldn't afford the "O", "R")

I used to wait until it gets dark and tell a yuppie to "STRIP! I wanna see some birthmarks!". Then, like a ninja dressed in black wit a ski-mask, I'd take all the fundz then I RUN down the street fast!

I vicked this yuppie named Eugene, took his brand new ring cuz stickin' up's an everyday routine. Once I was cruisin' in a beat-up ride, saw this yuppie named Clyde and snuck up on him from the blind side. I told him "Give up the dough before you get SMOKED!" ... "Oh, you broke? *BRAP BRAP* Now you DEAD-BROKE!".

The Big L was cold crazy. A top-notch crook snatchin' pocket-books from old ladies! I don't care, I'll do -ANYTHANG- to get a buck, even rob a miller truck, cuz: IDGAF!

Some say I'm ruthless, some say I'm grim. Once a burglar done broke into my house and I robbed him!

Plenty and many brains I bust, cuz I was livin the lifestyle of the poor and dangerous...

WORD! All of us, the 139'ers livin' the lifestyles of the poor and dangerous uknowmsayin'? This goes out to my brothers Big Lee and Don Ice, Reggie Reg, T.C, Todd, Lou, Black Tone, Whitey, Ty Speeder, Rue Dawg, Herb McGruff, E-jet, G-Love, Doc Ring, Slice & Rich Dice!

And I can't forget the 140 Lennox Ave crew! And I got to say RIP to Mate the Skate, Dog, and my man Kerry.

PEACE!

Almost brilliant slice of prose - like I tied my neck off with a piece of panty hose! Bellum omnium contra omnes, homeys! Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world.

is this poke intended to inspire a kind of critical insight about anarchism?

Assumed it was some ICP

Regarding law enforcement: I think the shady corners of the "security" industry are interesting. What about bouncers and other kinds of hired goons? These are people who tend to have conflict skills and experience with violence. It seems like half of them are wannabe pigs and the other half are the same shady scumbags that we're dodging the cops just a few years back until they realized a paycheque was less stress.

Security goons are actually a very mixed bunch, and the quality of the mixture depends on the socio-geographic context. In Montreal for instance you'll find some LGTBQ types as well as marxist beardos working for Garda (not kidding) or whatever else company, and I've know a few dudes working as security who were pretty nice, non-pretentious guys.

But there's also the anal-retentive fascist pig-wannabes, who're always pissed off with not being allowed to use the violence they'd like against people.... The funniest thing is that the most fascistic security guy I've seen lately could have been confused for a hippie, and was shamelessly bragging about his despotism to a conservative girlfriend while in one of the city's most Leftist academic faculties. As for the bouncers, that's a different crowd I don't know too much about, but I've seen several assisting the pigs in their brutality, as with the case of a famous homeless poet who was killed by pigs back in 1999 at the door of a St-Laurent nightclub.

I'd say this can be an interesting sector for anarchos to work into, even more so than the useless factories or the nonprofit easymoney jobs. Especially for those who haven't got their names associated with radical activity everywhere on/offline, so they can get hired more easily at key jobs, only to turn a blind eye on saboteurs or strikers when the time comes.

"What about bouncers?"

Ive met a few anarchists who work as bouncers/door people. They don't call the cops. They don't wanna act like a cop. They just want people be able to have a few drinks while being safe from creeps and agro people. Its good to have one person who knows how to do that well and is on it.

OP here, you're both a breath of fresh air. I'm definitely an anarchist (red/black) and I've done a lot of what you're describing. Had to switch to working as a goon years ago when my body couldn't handle intense physical labour anymore.

Like you said, a basic class analysis (not a Marxist) informs everything I do, so I won't work the kinds of jobs that force you to hassle the poor for making yuppies "uncomfortable".

But the work puts me right next to a lot of interesting information about how the state exerts dominance and responds to threats. The weirdest part is the psychological camouflage of wearing the word "security" on your clothes.

I'm literally wearing the same sketchbag shit I always do but you slap a T-shirt that says SECURITY on top and suddenly total strangers (even cops and the booj) will start to trust you and speak very candidly about themselves and their work. I just soak up the info while I'm getting paid to stand there and scowl.

As anarchists, we are passive drop-out culture duds. And as loyal products of the larger consumer society around us, we can only think about our own personal choices. How do we convincingly fantasize that the rest of the world revolves around our most immediate miserable survival choices? Capitalist consumer society is always going to exists. How do we sheepishly accommodate ourselves to it in ways that make our self-indulgent bunk philosophy feel good for us?

Everybody wave hello to Kevin

Nah, it's pervasive hierarchy that's the problem be that wherever it is.

Hierarchy is not a thing in itself, it arises due to a series of specific conditions being met. Hierarchy is no more to blame than many other "fundamental" concepts and factors

Hierarchy is a behavioral relation, in that regard you DO pay attention and lay blame. By conditions I hope you don't mean that in a Marxist sense.

Uhm... Yeah? Capitalism and statism are some of the more rigidly hierarchical forms of social organization, therefore anarchist theory is in opposition to them.

I can understand that there are regions where welfare is so scare or non-existent that anarchists have gotta cope with the need for money. But some jobs are gonna make a capitalist out of you and some others won't. It's got nothing to do with the salary or other conditions, it's the prospects for upward mobility. I won' be blaming or even shaming someone who works in industrial jobs, but only wonder what is their interest into this, when you can just "surf" out of the bubbles of the security industry. Being a university teacher in some faculty that isn't a corporate cash cow is the kind of career that won't make you dream of accumulating power and/or wealth, and that's why I'm down for this, theoretically. That's also why, on the other hadn, the blackmarket activity is dubious, as I don't see how this departs from capitalist exploitation and especially its drive to "get moar dough" and be some big shot. You can be a big shot anyway you want. The illusions of capital is how they promote a set of hierarchies presented as the only way to become important.

I think it matters a lot to be asking ourselves on the fundamental motivations behind having a job, and keeping them. This is what defines people as anarchistic more than the nature of the job itself, even tho the nature can be intertwined with the motives. I say this... being myself tempted by power. Sometimes waking up in the morning thinking about Jerry Bruckheimer and how he managed to become "big" and get a lot of privilege, get chicks on his yatch n shit, while I'm still living in apartments and school classes at my age. No, of course that's not what I wanna have, or ever wanted, and that's the point. Some part of our desires and intents are misguided and depersonalized, they are MANUFACTURED INTENT, and that's why they deserve to be questioned and analyzed.

Of course there are jobs which contribute to bigger wrongs. This is also something that needs to be looked into carefully, and something proscribed by the doctrine of capitalist faith. I could have ended up as a construction worker, just a few years back... producing MORE society where I really wanted to fight it.

You don't become a capitalist until you're slinging around large sums of capital in ways that can seriously impact other people's lives (starting businesses, investing, property speculation, etc).

Being a worker who wants to escape a precarious existence isn't the same thing at all IMO. I've been on-and-off welfare for a long time and I didn't find it liberating at all, doubly so for the lowest wage jobs. The fickle moods of the workers at the welfare office were the same as any shitty boss.

Even within the drop-out culture, somebody still owns (claims to own) the land you're squatting on and can turn on you at any moment. These are the lines of tension we're forced to exist in. The only thing that separates us from most of society is the degree to which we're aware of these tensions and occasionally (usually very briefly) in active opposition to them.

You become a capitalist by seeking, through tacit means, to accumulate your capital, so to say, the incrase the surplus value which allows to reinvest in gaining more power or consolidate it. Everyprole can theoretically do that in democratic liberal capitalism, and many actually do.

To claim that the capitalists are just this elite class of families and gangs who've accumulated vast wealth is placing an externalized binary over our heads, which makes us lose sight of the capitalistic patterns happening.

Study how capitalism has developped, where it came from. In th beginning it was just a bunch of trade companies and lawyers, which progressively went up the social ladder, mostly in admninistrative and financial duties, in order to multiply their capital. Being a restaurant manager isn't really being a capitalist. That's jsut another way to generate revenues to sustain yourself and maybe have slightly better conditions.

Seeking to increase your profits by expanding operations or incorporating and opening new branches... that's more like it. Just like some Appelistes consolidating their grasp over a milieu of dissent by multiplicating infrastructures (spaces, projects, etc)and keeping them under control. Another form of capital accumulation.

There's a clear qualitative difference between seeking to get yourself out of misery though better occupations, and pursuing an ideal or dream of material wealth or prosperity. That was my point. Which one you think is more likely to morally support capitalist gimmicks? Or which one is making me feel like a total loser when I wake up in the morning just because I failed to be stupid Jerry Bruckheimer? lol

I know I'm a social loser, but chasing mirages won't help against that.

I agree with the last paragraph tho.

"You become a capitalist by seeking to accumulate your capital" No ... You don't.

You're not usually this pedantic fauve, so if you cut the bullshit, I won't take offense. The issue here isn't a failure of understanding economics on my part, it's a glossing over of the issue of social mobility on your part.

For the vast majority of "normal people", relative to different standards of living in different parts of the world, whatever capital we manage to accrue goes to personal spending on immediate needs and maybe a few personal luxuries.

Most people are guilty of participation, complacency and often petty self-gratification type stuff BUT this isn't remotely comparable to the power and social control wielded by the real capitalists. Most significantly, even a glance at the data from the past few decades demonstrates how the end-game is concentrating most of the wealth in very few hands and locking the social stratification in place, which is typical of empires in decline.

Your mistake is a bit like blaming average people for failing to recycle a few cans while an oil company destroys entire ecosystems. It's a fallacy of relativism, confusing symptoms for the disease.

Are a functional conseqence of a system not the driver. Capitalists do not primarily drive capital, it's a whole series of belief and behavior co-factors mostly from the social base.

That's just a highly subjective opinion that negates personal responsibility. I completely disagree.

By point out that capital is primarily driven by belief and behavior one drives home the need for a personal corporeal orientation in regards to things like material attachments. Blaming capitalists for most of your problems is what negates personal responsibility.

You're negating the personal responsibility of the capitalists. They wield more influence, therefore should be held more responsible. This is basic... BASIC analysis of authority.

If we all declare that the capitalists are personally responsible for the existing condition, THAT will make BOTH Go Away!

Sounds about right;)

Ffs ... It wasn't me suggesting anything here. Just ziggy's shitty logic getting to me.

Well okay I guess I may have sounded like that was my propos, but it wasn't. I guess it's too boring and stale to be agreeing online about stuff, so we twist things a little towards disagreements and righting wrongs, then either me or you can get out of the troll cascade feeling like Batman, BUT THIS ALL AN ILLUSION! (read with a heavy German accent).

So are the proles being capitalists or just behaving as such? I don't think that's too important to distinguish. They participate actively and passionately in the capitalist GoT, and that's about it. They ain't doing it to survive, or even a decent life, for by pursuing the dream of getting rich. Or wtf people are still fucking buying lottery tickets in 2017? Didja notice?

And this ain't a matter of blame, but rather a very problematic issue, woth roots found at the very beginnings of this colony we got here. Well a bit earlier, I guess. Like the times when Christianity gave birth to capitalist exploitation.

Anyways I just realized I'm far too important for you.

And what am I doing on this site? Good grief!

Well hopefully you did leave because you're right that almost anything else would be a better use of your time but I'm not trolling, for the record. I'm being sincere when I say your definitions seem a little hazy to me.

It's always easy to direct hostility at the "good Germans" around you, I get it. I just don't think anarchists should be picking easier targets out of laziness and shitty analysis.

But then again, I think they should be active too, which is another surprisingly contentious issue on this site.

"Your mistake is a bit like blaming average people for failing to recycle a few cans while an oil company destroys entire ecosystems. It's a fallacy of relativism, confusing symptoms for the disease."

???

Who has been actively and passionately taking part in the ecocidal devastation in northern Alberta for the last 15-20 years? A handful of robber baron capitalist working hard to dig for tar sands with their own bare hands? No. It was the proles. Especially proles from the Atlantic coast, with behind them an history of sucking nature dry through other means, like mass industrial scale fishing and mining.

Am I denying the responsibility of dem big capitalists? No. But you are omitting by design the shared responsibility of those who have been their foot soldiers in the tar sands mines. And they made a lot of dough, even compared to the billions done by the shareholders.

Read the book: "How finance capital is not about profiting from sales, but from the flows of big money invested, and YOU" by Webster Crabapple. (Penguin Books, 1976)

And Everyprole in neoliberal capitalism can be a shareholder, didja didja know? This helps solving the mystery of why the tar sands industry has been making shitloads of dough, even while having astronomical costs of operations. More money in, more money out.

Forgot to add... "Misery" isn't just merely measured by the credit or bitcoins you got. It is defined qualitatively. Like my own misery, which is undeniable, has nothing to do with the money I have access to at the moment. There's tons of poor or street people who got much better living conditions than I have. Relations and networking are major -if not central- factors of quality of living these days, and I really just suck at it. Good friends or acquaintances are what brings the real goodies.

The last big Rockefeller was also known for his supermassive Rolodex....

Annd now you seem to be mixing up personal/emotional/social stuff with economics. Fuzzy thinking I'm afraid... My sympathies though.

The margins and limits between economy and personal problems are always that well-defined!? Not, much I would say. I cut distinctions with my conceptual machete where there actually are causes for it, but that really pisses me off when people compartment things that, in real life, are all interwoven and intertwined. That makes me wanna cut, cut, cut some people lol.

Thanks for the empathy, though.

Don't care if you don't like it dude.
Here watch me!

Basic needs met or not? Economics.
Relationships? That's on you.

Sure, sometimes your relationships affect your ability to meet your basic needs but even the most batshit asshole lunatic shouldn't have to starve or freeze to death IMO.

Okay... i get that's a stretch, but the relations between people in Western over-developped countries tend to be taking this shape/sensitivities where some dudes will be left to die in the cold outside. And this fucking happened in some big cities. Even tho the relationship of such culture to economics in't obvious, it's all there.

Yeah, I hear you. This is why I'm an anticapitalist and was talking about responsibility earlier. When somebody freezes to death under a bridge in a wealthy city, "the system is to blame" isn't a good enough answer for me. The blame goes to the smug scum hoarding much more wealth than they need. (The capitalists)

Same externalizations to me.

If you got plenty of room in your heated loft/flat and you see somebody outside who expresses the need for a place where to dwell, responsibility's on you as well. Otherwise I'd be calling that ideological dodging.

Using marxist externalization to legitimate your own cowardice/carelessness? Typical of the Leftists.

Part of what makes 19th century anarchy/anarchism so much better than the 20th century form is due to the interplay between proles and aristocrats. There needs to be a return of that 19th century structure.

Right now there are too many anarchists who are losers. That's not the worst thing in the world but for anarchic orientation to be better you need some anarchist/anarch minds who are worth millions. I would think most of would be in the art and aesthetic sphere of reality. One thing's for sure is that there are too many anarchists that are too comfortable with teaching positions. One of the big developments of anarchy in the 21st century needs to be arguing for the abolition of education. It's the sequel to work.

Don't you work a shitty tech job ziggy?

That doesn't change the strength of my points though.

It makes me wonder why you think you'd be an authority on the subject?

How does that determine the efficacy of a point?

Right ... Since you're not a realist, the things you say are their own validation. This is what the internet does to people *facepalm*

The solution is to go on S.S.I. -- then in anarchist subcultural safe spaces you can pretend to the easily fooled that you are a mighty and implacable enemy of the social order!

There've already been whole eras of revolutionaries-on-welfare, they've made zines about it, I spent half my 20s doing it. You get on the dole and supplement with petty crime. It can be "lifestylism" or necessity or a bit of both.

The only interesting thing about it is if there's thousands of you all doing it and you get together in the streets for a mask party every few weeks. A worthy use of the excess of spare time.

Yes! And if we rewild in the backwoods, God will rain welfare checks from the sky! (Haven't you heard? S.S.I. has existed for 1.8 million years!) Oh, and God will also rain $$$ from the sky to buy Land near lots of Forest Service territory! And hunter-gatherer-permaculturist humans have ALWAYS been flakes with no practical skills! (How ELSE have humans been around since the formation of Homo erectus/ergaster 1.8 million years ago?)

Welfare is only the civilized, artificial version of having a river of clean fresh water nearby, and some fertile soil around.

Not that much of a big deal to go live in the wild. Materially at least. It may be the hardest on the psyche and the affect

The bigger deal is how to make a kind of communal utopia out of it, one that's got an edge over the surrouding social environment, while not turning out to be a bunch of self-absorbed subcultural morons, like in many cases. Openness is a rare luxury these days.

Living mostly in the ancestral Way requires high competence at many skills. This will require a transition. Hardest on the psyche? I suppose if you tried to go total all at once (not a good idea). The backwoods are extremely GOOD for my psyche. One of my aims is to receive full-blown "mystical experience" (Direct Knowledge) with NO psychedelics (this DID happen for me once). Except that God has already provided Psilocybe cyanensis in these same backwoods.

Just a place of belonging(utopia means nowhere). It really would be nice to see something like bioregionalism take of as it could be a useful political economic vessel for anarchic living experiments.

Get a job, make some money. Or don't. But if you do, aside from the classic forbidden trades (cops, prison guards, etc), don't worry too much about what it is as long as you're not in a position (and of the inclination to) undermine the activities of rebel workers. In my experience, it pays to pick a job where you have a lot of autonomy but get a regular paycheck. Lots of opportunities for slacking and such. Don't snitch. Resist when you can, as much as you can but, hey, you got rent to pay, too, so do it smart and do it at the right time. Don't invest yourself in the identity of your boss's business. Don't be a "company man". There's no requirement to live in poverty or on the edge. It doesn't make you more valid and, trust me, in this economy you'll find yourself unemployed at various points so you can catch up on your cred deficit then. Capitalism gives us a raw deal and saving some money is a good idea, if you can. It can even help you rebel since you won't be so under their thumb. But it can also help you escape the dreariness of life by allowing you to experience some of the pleasures of life which cost money or are too risky to steal. Or whatever. What do I know?

You know more than most of these jokers, that's legit.

Better yet, create your own job with no boss (or join a worker co-op). More freedom and twice the income. And you don't even have to pay rent. Self-employment as a landscape contractor, while living in a truck w/camper shell for 6 years, is what financed my original Land project. FAR less opportunity in my trade since 2008, tho.

Due to my middle class upbringing and having chosen a path of "success" since before I was an anarchist, I kept walking that path while becoming an anarchist and now I work a high paying (low 6 figures) job. The plan is to sell myself for a decade or two until I get enough money to retire early.

A few points on this.

  • Working fucking sucks, I want out. It's destroying my body and draining my mind, leaves basically no time for relationships and fun and my @ projects.
  • The whole company's mission I'm against and it shapes culture in a way that disgusts me.
  • What retirement actually means is pumping lots of money into investments so it grows to a size that the interest can cover my expenses once I retire. This means basically investing in national and international capitalism (through index funds/stocks/etc) and indirectly funding everything I hate.

I don't feel good about it. I don't feel good about any of the options I have to live in this world. This one seems like the way I can be the most free for the longest (retirement).

Roast me.

I mean... Yeah, you're yuppie scum but you admit it and I respect that!

I was a petty street thug, the liberals kept hurling that label at me and eventually I realized that going semi-legit hired thug had way better margins and no risk of jail.

Now the liberals pay me to make them feel "safe" from people like me. It's hilarious.

Adding to this that horrible feeling of wasting your time twice... Like when you're wasting your days doing nothing much, multiplied with the burden of wasting your days doing stuff that doesn't make any sense to you... like being a unsignificant cog in a vast machine for which you are only a statistic.

Way to go, workerists... your beliefs are worse than Xtianity. While actually very close to some brands of Xtianity.

It's not our "beliefs" you pompous brat, it's a gun to our head. I've been homeless and now I'm a wage-slave because I like hot showers and a warm, dry bed. You ever ate out of a dumpster? It's actually not that bad sometimes.

I always go dine at the dumspter deli whenever needed. I also lift quality food from yuppie markets quite often.

Did also do the extreme adventure sleeping experience at -25 outside in a city for a while. Made me see the scenesters with a different eye.

Living in a truck w/camper shell is no big deal if you choose not to live where it gets -25 outside. There are actually a number of advantages to it besides paying NO rent. And I knew where to git hot showers. I did this for 6 years; its just another skill.

"Live in a truck?! But WHAT will people THINK?!" "Guess what? What people think ISN'T going to pay for my Home in the backwoods!" (I DID, however, conceal my living arrangement from prospective landscape clients.)

Just to say that last answer in your parody dialogue was the best no-nonsense I've read in months! You win the entire internets for today.
.

I'm more of a biking dude, and did some bike traveling for a long while. Surely not as lofty as having your own camper van, but lots more freedom and less hassle and maintenance costs. Must be somewhat boring and long across Canuhda tho, but hey maybe I'll end up doing it...

You did all that but your piss poor reading of neitzche still makes you say such stupid things? That's a shame.

*Nietzsche* FFS!

Yeah, I always fuck up Fred's name but usually nobody around here notices cause they're so busy trying to dig up his corpse and blow him.

Sorry ;)

So we're turning our noses up at "scenesters" now? I thought we were talking about how it's lazy and shitty to hurl "Xtian slave morality" at everyone like you just discovered Nietzsche.

Do you prefer the topic stays on whoever's not as cool as you? ;)

Anews is my personal vehicle of "revealing" my grandeur online, in comparison to those un-enlightened ones who still don't "get-it". Nevermind about these claims of having poor social skills... that's just false modesty to show my great soul!

What else... Of yeah.

I discovered Nietzsche when I was 14. ;-P

Oh was that you posting as anon earlier? I withdraw my sass, you're alright fauve.

Roast? I feel sad for you. I'm a landscape contractor, and at age 60, have NO interest in retirement. My final BIG "landscape" project in the backwoods will enable me to live on very little $$$ income. I'll take Social Security at age 68 or 69 (if it still exists), but will continue "working". I've never had a problem with the word "work", since I haven't associated it with suffering/unhappiness for over 30 years. By Bob Black's definition, what I do isn't even "work". (Why once I was even given what is called "mystical experience" - WITHOUT LSD - while up in a tree doing a pruning job. No, I did not fall out of the tree.)
Yuppie is an ugly trap for even those who "succeed" at it (and have the opportunity to do so).

Hmmm yeeees, embracing the Sambian warrior ethic and landscaping, as quirky and kinky as that preference and occupation may be, is still far more creative than say a mining magnate's destruction of indigenous forests.

Anarchyism: the socialism of consumer society passivity specimens.

Wether private or public, in this contemporary world, working for money is no vice
And doing without is no virtue. That given , aspire to that in which you have desire
Or interest. Develop your capabilities as they are afforded.
Leave time to express your ideals , privately and publicly. A full social life,
Including work- related settings are important in and of themselves.
Leave time for liberatory activity of a creative nature as they happen.
We should live our lives as " happenings" . Some of the best times occur precisely
" by "happenstance"! Good concepts, good praxis, all in due time, will
Occur. Our attitude here on this site is one of mutual aid, freedom, resoluteness,and yes, "good works".
" Bring It On!

and get a job, hippie!

I've worked all my life.
I am retired now.
And I say and do as I please.
I wish you the same good fortune,
Despite your resentment.

If we all made more money, these legal funds and social spaces would get funded a lot easier, just saying.

I just tripped over this comment to realize how lame and liberal it is.

Social spaces require that we pay capitalist landlords (or at best State-funding bureaucratic parasites) for existing. Wow. Anarchy is for in a few decades when we'll finally be legally-cautioned to be squatting.
'
Same for making money... only vile subservience to the industry, 40-50 hrs a week, can get us money. Robberies? Theft? Extortion? Fancy frauds? Quit those funny ideas, comrade! That was for the early 20th century... or maybe Greece a few years back.

I can work , but my experience is devoid of the X-tianized ethic of the work, which has been placed into a linear time framework, thus the mortgage, the debt, the credit. Work and labor has been emptied of any value other than that which is the quantity of manufactured goods. I on the contrary can still have a circular recycling creative perspective of time and apply this to any task which then takes on a self perpetuating existence and not the finite product of a planned obsolescence, if you know what I mean in the existentialist nihilist approach?

At the long awaited point in history when the United States has entered into an irreversible accelerating historical slide, anarchistnews.org does all that it can to repeatedly prove that what gets called anarchism in today's U.S. has nothing to contribute in any aggressive, positive sense to the possibility of new forms of mass collective resistance.

The relentless adolescent narcissism on display here adds up to this:

1. Our "anarchism" is a self-indulgent personal trip,

2. How can we have more play-dates keeping our feeble selves entertained?

As always with anarchistnews.org, there is no perspective in this for ongoing collective action against capitalist society, on terms that are presumably unique to anarchism, or that might tend to demonstrate that their interpretation of anarchism is a better way to fight for a different type of society than, say, Marxism-Leninism, Trotskyism, or electoral cretinism a la 'Jacobin' magazine.

The perspective here is resolutely one of passivity, atomization, morbid self-absorption and an ethos of weakness. The question here, plainly stated is, what is your miserable atomized individual survival strategy while clinging to your personal identity with a body of ideas that make you feel good and are of course of absolutely no use in a larger fight against wage labor and commodity production.

along with your tired marxist jargon, your nagging is noxious and wholly unimpressive, especially given your history of alienating everyone unlucky enough to be involved in anything with you on even the most superficial level. maybe think about the fact that you have nothing to show for yourself before having the cheek to scold others. just a thought, you little prick

You are, again, confusing a strategy or paradigm for the acknowledgement by some anarchists of their own situations and context. We ARE atomized, and being continuously atomized by society. Of course finding ways out of isolation is part of the goal, if not the frontline of any anarchist struggle around here. Wtf your "adolescent narcissists" are involved in outreach efforts like Anews, LBC and podcasts? Just because they wanna spread their egos all over NA gay commie scenes!? I doubt so. At least I have a hard time believing that's the only explanation.

Futhermore, I don't see dogmatic, one-sided sites like IGD and sadly now Submedia being any more supportive of a more widespread collective strategy than Anews. The fact that some of us, like me, are questioning the conditions and contexts of collective cooperation has nothing to do with isolationism. This is purely anarchistic, as in being for FREE ASSOCIATION between independent-thinking, intelligent persons. No anarchists just join or follow some struggle or actions just because their dear buddies are into it, or they got this ideological engagement to follow. I don't want that fucking Anarcho-Commie USSR. Left Unity buh-bye.

yes, it's that Keating guy. i applaud your attempt at engaging in a good faith dialog with him, but you must know that it's pointless
since he's a marxist ideologue and not a particularly nice fellow either.

There does come a point where niche spaces run their course and anarchism is at that point right now with the milieu. Problem is he's a fucking class war Marxoid. That cancels out anything useful he might have to say regarding the actualization of anarchy.

If the sting of Keating's critiques are canceled out by his being an idiot, then why bother commenting on it? They're canceled and therefore irrelevant.

Your talking points on antifa might also have a few good points buried in them, but they are canceled out by you being obtuse; this is coming from someone who also finds much lacking about antifa and anarchism. The problem is that your ideas are a jumbled mess.

Also my analysis is anything but obtuse. If you've read me here as well as on reddit as well as da twitta I spell out VERY clearly and concisely what I am about in regards to Neo-Anarchy.

no one believes their own analysis to be obtuse, for fucks sake dude. you may spell out your ideas, but because they are a jumble, they are anything but clear and concise. every considered a secretary/editor? you know, someone who's more than an imaginary friend. someone who will actually tell you when you're full of shit, cuz it just seems like nobody had ever done that with you. your thoughts and ideas are incoherent, almost to the point of being unprincipled (which is probably not even an insult to you).

hey! leave the anarch alone with its preferred corporeal activities, its service industry job, its apartment, its little sandbox…
there is no State until it knocks on his door, says he. are you the State? knocking at his door, insisting he appease your thoughts and principles? would you achieve a satisfactory degree of trust for SirE by coercing his dumb ass to fit into YOUR box ?

The at you door comment involved what a physical threat was. Get what I said right at least. Also, I never claimed to be a supreme practitioner, most of you have shitty jobs as well. The point is I at least have the better theory down on what anarchy should be.

"anarchy should be" for whom, sir?

For those who want a world without mediation and organization:)

does trust constitute a mediating force? what about shells and membranes, walls and doors and call-outs?
isn't existence constituted through some organizing sense of soundness ?
a process needs more than just one monster, o anarch; won't you come out to play ?

I usually mean those which are tied to overly formal language and behavior and apparatus. Default mediations and organizing systems tied to the physical power process is a different matter. I don't hate the physical world so I don't hate those things. Chaos can indeed have its order at the margins.

Just because the world is default anarchic and void of meaning does not mean one cannot have preferences.

at what point is marginal preference as tied to the physical power process identified as an overly formal apparatus?

Are given re-callable weight over others. When the duty imperative of weighted 'shoulds' and 'oughts' rear their ugly heads and begins to snuff out other preferences as well as more importantly aspirations.

I'm a lawyer and I work for the government. Also, i'm an individualist anarchist and neither me or my boss seem to think it's inappropriate. Complete anarchy, union of egoists, world-wide communism are all utopias, we can only strive to make the best out of what we have in a way that benefits our interests the most. Things you do or don't do matter, not the name that's put in the contract. Even as a prison guard an anarchist can find a way to use it for those in need.

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?
S
2
q
6
Z
q
5
Enter the code without spaces.