Identity Politics on Immediatism Podcast

Enjoy these nine episodes on identity and critiques of identity. Lupus Dragonowl discusses the politics of affect and suggests exodus versus submersion in identities. Locating a Green and Pink Anarchy, by Artxmis Graham Thoreau, is a newer essay to The Anarchist Library. Lawrence Jarach provides a number of excellent jumping-off points for a study group discussion. Neal Keating looks at race as a fiction. Andy Robinson critiques ethnicity as social control, and this essay was included in AJODA #62. Together, these pieces give a round sampling of the ideas on identity that are available on

Against Identity Politics 1: Spectres, Joylessness, and the Contours of Ressentiment, by Lupus Dragonowl
Against Identity Politics 2
Against Identity Politics 3
Essentialism and the Problem of Identity Politics, by Lawrence Jarach
Locating a Green and Pink Anarchy, by Artxmis Graham Thoreau
What is a Race?, by Neal Keating
Ethnic Politics as Integration 1, by Andy Robinson
Ethnic Politics as Integration 2
Ethnic Politics as Integration 3

There are 33 Comments

So, there's now a non-ugly version of AJODA, now that the Berkeleyoids are no longer producing it?

the long-promised ajoda will still be produced in berkeley, philistine.

Will this be the same group that put out the really cringey podcast recently only without Jason Mcquinn? I see Lawrence still has a platform. I’m not sure how I feel about that.

Oh, did Lawrence get deplatformed while I wasn't looking? What heinous sin caused his excommunication from the saintly heights of the totally healthy holy and transparent Bay Area anarchist scene?

Bob Black repeatedly ran to the police to get revenge on people who he had beefs with. As for Lawrence Jarach, I don't like him, but he shouldn't be the subject of malicious gossip.

The egoist uses any means to get what he desires. Stirner would approve of using the cops to exact revenge on his enemies. Bob Black has achieved the highest form of egoism. I wonder if Stirner would approve of domestic violence, however.

Stirner approved of nothing. He knew that inserting oneself into another's cause was a waste of time, plus there was no social media back in 19th century germany.

But you are also correct in the sense that an egoist uses all tools available to them unless they know better. Anarchists refrain from calling the cops both because they want to smash the state, and they know that calling the cops is pretty much always counter-productive.

Lol...I love the ridiculous spin you put on this. Having someone pull a gun on you is reduced to a harmless "beef".

There still seems to be low information readers out there who actually believe all the the anti-Black propaganda from nearly 30 years ago and can't let it go.

Platforming a domestic abuser is one step removed from femicide and this places AJODA in the same company as Atassa.

When do anarchists stop categorizing people on the basis of the worst thing they may have done? Once an abuser always an abuser? Is that really where you're at?

Let's say a person actually did a horrible act; how long are they judged based on that? Can they heal, provide reparations to the victim, or do or become anything else ever again or are they always the bad act?

What sort of anarchists are you all if people are never allowed the opportunity to get better. None of us can live up to that standard.

likely to get from @news anons...why are all these super self-absorbed humans always zeroing in on what makes OTHER humans so bad? I'm seeing a lot of trash talk on Lawrence in this thread and no info on why people hate him, why "the Berkeley anarchists are (whatever)" know, the typical tone of moralizing politicons.

There's of course the more troubling cases where someone is hurting lots of people and just wantS to keep doing it, but a lot of those cases would get undone very easily if people didn't occupy institutional positions of power.

that said, lj tried to kill a lover, put her in the hospital, and went to prison for it. to my knowledge he has said that's he's learned a lot, so much, in prison. but there is no evidence that he is doing any more than mouthing the words.
i won't be answering any more than that. i don't hate him, but it is undeniable that he fucked up.

but the question of what people can do after they've fucked up remains a crucial one. and whether someone is trusted again will have to always be a subjective issue, based on specific relationships, among other things.

That alleged quote sounds like you channeling Trump and doesn't sound anything like Lawrence. Rumor harder!
So was he charged with attempted murder? Which prison did he do his time in? How long was his sentence? What's happened to his lover since then? Where did Lawrence go? So many questions raised and nobody to answer...

He's on Facebook if any of you have the brass to ask him directly. Yeah, I thought not...

I think the saying should be, “if any of you have the tact to not ask him.’ Don’t feel bad about using the common, misogynistic rendering you used. Society has brainwashed you into thinking that directly confronting people about uncomfortable topics is brave and good and that it somehow relates to having large testicles—a trait that no woman could have.

I agree with your point about the patriarchal metaphor of courage as requiring brass balls, but your alleged corrective sentence is contradictory. Tact is a quality that indicates respect and deference, so it makes little sense to *not* ask someone a question using tact; that's just keeping quiet. One *could* ask a non-judgmental, unprejudiced question using tact. However, given the hostility toward the person being talked about, I doubt if anyone would have either the courage or tact to ask him anything about the hullabaloo.

quotation marks are called quotation marks because they indicate... quotations. paraphrases shouldn't ever be put inside quotation marks in order to avoid misattribution and misquoting. scare quotes are authoritarian -- you're presuming that you know better than anyone else what the reality is behind something. there are other ways of indicating that you mean something ironically. maybe you need to read more?

of course its understandable why all the sock puppet anons don't want to believe you (they clearly don't know anything about lawrence or the situation), but what you're describing sounds very there anything that lawrence is doing currently that would give cause for concern? Just week i'm going down to visit a lady friend of mine who stalked and harassed by one of her friends and got the courts involved (which ended up working out okay for everyone), so any information i can gather on why people do the things they do so that i can live my life pretty happy would be nice.

here's what 14:46 said:
"lj tried to kill a lover, put her in the hospital, and went to prison for it. to my knowledge he has said that's he's *learned a lot, so much, in prison.* but there is no evidence that he is doing any more than mouthing the words.
i won't be answering any more than that. i don't hate him, but it is undeniable that he fucked up."
pay attention

Thanks for the Boy's Room urinal wall gossip stuff. I already saw that. How bout impersonating a grounded rational person, use some specific detail, and don't spread malicious rumors while doing it.

So entitled to your gossip. Maybe don’t expect others to keep you apprised of things that you have nothing to do with?

So the question about actually asking the person implicated in the abuse was deleted. Why? Are people not allowed to ask questions? What the hell, thecollective?

your question was a smug provocation to satisfy your out-of-the-loop craving for gossip. the answer, however, is yes. people have bothered to ask him. clearly you have not. who has “weak sauce” now?

the question was followed by accusations, name-calling, and assumptions, all of them incorrect and inflammatory.

why are you blaming my question for the responses it provoked?

sure i'm out of the loop -- hence my desire for the actual story. my craving is for facts rather than gossip, but perhaps you mistook my frustration with the scene's obvious preference for dog piles as smugness. if i'm provoking anything, it's a general challenge to people in the scene to learn the truth rather than jumping on a deplatforming bandwagon based on gossipy virtue signaling.

has anyone been authorized to share his version of the relevant events and their aftermath publicly? which people (who aren't afraid of the usual guilt-by-association) have bothered to ask him, and where are their report backs? wouldn't that go against the deplatforming dog pile? that anonymous paraphrase about him "learning a lot from prison" is absurd, mostly because it's not something that he would say or think. again, he's on facebook, so if anyone is actually interested, they can ask him directly. so far it's just been crickets.

the a) smugness, b) lack of need for the information, c) hypocrisy that you want someone else to go ask him, when you dn't want to yourself.

yes, you can't believe things you read online. but sometimes they're true anyway.
what's the self-righteous protector-of-the-accused to do?!

You admittedly have no idea what this is about, crave gossip to satisfy your craving, and take it upon yourself to challenge others to “learn *the truth* rather than jumping on a *deplatforming bandwagon* based on gossipy **virtue signaling**”… There’s a word that describes this. Also, don’t think your alt-right phrasings don’t go unnoticed. Maybe be less of a smug coward and ask him for information yourself before you go teaching lessons to others?

Add new comment