Add new comment

I'll add my own heading, conflict, something he had quite the reputation for, and lead with a quote from the appropriately conflictually titled essay Why social war is a bad way to practice anarchy:

The new thinking, after WWII, is that we can wrap up total victory by way of annihilating the forces of state and capital but this is deeply naïve. There is no version of this story that would not require the equivalent destruction of millions if not billions of deaths in service of our better-than-what-came-before holy war. Social warriors do not desire the genocide of any particular people, and would probably be offended at the implication BUT would probably accept that the total destruction of bad ideas is worth doing and would like us to all join in the dice roll where the implications of what comes after isn’t just unclear but clearly war thinking and social in all the shallow, vapid, ways this entails today.

Part of my formative experience as an anarchist was watching projects and relationships fall apart and people walking away hurt and often angry because they didn't have the conflict they should have had with others because they didn't want to step on toes, valued consensus and friendships they assumed to be too delicate to handle serious disagreements more than risking what might happen because of conflict, and because they viewed some conflicts as a winner-takes-all situation where they had to win and others had to disappear. This last point is where the quote above comes in, which is, if we're not going to destroy everyone who disagrees with us or who we even might hate for reasons few would disagree with, what do we do with them, if anything?

Years before I'd meet A!, I asked the same thing to myself with regard to a friend who'd been involved, often on the giving end, in an abusive relationship (among other things). The answer I came up with was to not try to disappear this person (or let them disappear), but I was uneasy the alternative I found in continuing our friendship with a bit more openness between us,the rifts somewhat smoothed over by the fact that he was getting counseling and the people who came out of this conflict hating him had handled things badly in trying to eliminate him.

Post meeting A! and others around LBC and post my time at the compound, where the first and only rule I was given was no passive aggression, only attack, I (unfortunately) had another opportunity to have a similar conflict with this person. It fucking sucked, but I came out of it feeling much better because I engaged with it wholeheartedly without feeling I had to either tolerate or embrace him to avoid poisonous cancel culture or dismiss him because he was doing something terrible.

One of the things I was struck by in meeting A! was his wrist tats of the symbols from bolo'bolo, which both looked cool and I think communicated his own feelings on conflict - that there is no utopia where people you don't like don't exist, and that it's probably better to negotiate those relationships (even if that means staying far away from them) rather than engage in a war of elimination.