The Anarchists Episode #7: The Fight for Better Wages, Freedom of the Press, and more...

  • Posted on: 1 May 2017
  • By: thecollective

Listen here

In this episode we talk about the minimum wage and why it's a good idea to raise it, we do a roundup of the latest election news, cover the recent developments in Chechnya, as well as the latest attempts to silence whistleblowers.



I find it kind of amusing that you're doing a podcast on freedom of the press when you refused to publish a really critical article I submitted on the April 28 protests to stop the Bayer-Monsanto merger.

The article was rejected for publication on this site and on multiple other anarchist sites. Anti-GMO work I have submitted in the past has been similarly shut out. I get a really strong "20-something male gatekeeper" vibe with extremely narrow allowable parameters for discourse/subject matter on these sites, and it does a real disservice to anarchism, in general. (Especially considering that a tonne of navel-gazing, self-referential blah blah blah is posted as legit information on these sites...)

I'm a professional journalist, and the quality of the article was high - higher than many of the other articles published here.

There is a huge amount of public opposition to the GMO/chemical corporations and to Big Pharma, and this opposition is growing. These corporations/industries produce deadly and debilitating products that maim and kill people on a daily basis. Sites like this should be fostering that opposition as well as public awareness/information exchange.

The article I submitted to the various anarchist sites had the astrological references taken out, but if anyone is interested, this is the original version (with astro):

From Millions Against Monsanto to Billions Against Bayer:

I would really encourage the people heading the popular anarchist sites of the day to open the parameters a little if you want to have any growth or new energy.

you wrote:

"I find it kind of amusing that you're doing a podcast on freedom of the press when you refused to publish a really critical article I submitted on the April 28 protests to stop the Bayer-Monsanto merger."

just to be clear, i'm quite sure that this podcast announcement you are commenting on is not a podcast made by the anarchist news ppl, but rather by a completly different project that has nothing to do with publishing txts on this site.

on the other hand, the @news podcast is located here and sticked at the top of @news.

Sorry, there is obvious hypocrisy even in posting the podcasts of others re: freedom of the press and silencing whistleblowers while acting as gatekeepers keeping critically important and relevant dissenting information off this site.

The exclusion of my own article was most certainly politically motivated. And my critique is bang on.

What were your infos about, and could you possibly share that on, say, /r/anarchism? If it's an issue of making very sensitive data avaliable available perhaps you can put it on a Tor pastebin or something?

It's likely that Thecollective don't wanna be dealing with FBI house raids at 6 AM, so here's why they might be removing sensitive stuff. But there's also the issue of your own safety.

just checked the submission log, and no txt was submitted by willow on 4/28, before or after with any such title. they are claiming to be a professional journalist and either don't understand how to submit a txt or are not being honest.

- thecollective not signed in 1.8

Wrong! I submitted it twice...once directly to your email address. I received an email back from you guys telling me to submit articles through the "Add Content" link on the site (a little snippily, I might add). Which I did.

So I submitted it twice. You had two copies. And it was rejected.

I submitted it before April 28, of course, ahead of the actual protests. I have since deleted my email sent files or I could give you the exact date. But it was there. Twice. Between April 14 and 25, I would say.

(Not to mention, taking my comments down on the same "freedom of the press/silencing whistleblowers" podcast.

The comments have since been reinstated after I repeatedly re-posted them.)

willow, if by "politically motivated" you mean that we don't post things that don't mention or imply anarchy in some way, then you are correct.
there are plenty of sites that feature stories about mass protests, etc.
if you want stories posted here, then perhaps you can write about how anarchists might benefit from these protests, or why they're anarchist in practice, if not in theory, or any of a half-dozen things that i can imagine off the top of my head. i will probably disagree with you, but it will at least be more likely to be published here.
but just stomping your foot and saying "you should publish this" is neither clever nor compelling. and calling names when you don't get your way is just funny. funny is great but probably not what you're going for.

also, the anarchists is a podcast by a small group of people who were banned from reddit/r/anarchism. they post on youtube.
postproletarian podcaster is a different person and posts their 'casts on the postproletarian site.
the anarchistnews podcast is posted here (as roc mentioned) and stickied at the top of the front page.
if you had actually listened to them, you would probably have picked up that they're different, since... they're quite distinct in format, voice, and tone.

Well at least I'm actually convinced that at a minimum, one anarchist won a may day battle.

You don't know what anarchy is if you think anarchy has to mention anarchy in order to be anarchy!

Anarchy is people organizing to do things on their own, particularly involving opposition to or an alternative to the state. They don't have to be detailing every Highly Anarchist Action (TM) they undertake within that lens every second of every day. That's the self-referential wankery I'm talking about, and it's completely suffocating to what's really going on.

Why cover the Standing Rock protests and not the anti-GMO/anti-Bayer-Monsanto merger protests then?

How does Standing Rock "specifically affect anarchists?"

Or Black Lives Matter?

You claiming there is no political motivation for what you decide to publish and what you don't decide to publish is b.s.

(Again, completely skewed understanding of what anarchism is, too. Anarchist is a way of being, not a political label or a narrow group of subjects. But it's certainly being treated like a political label tied to a narrow group of subjects.)

I'm a professional journalist, yes. And I'm an anarchist.

Things that affect the whole of the human population (like GMOs infiltrating our food supply, like the millions of deaths and injuries caused by dangerous pharmaceuticals being handed out like Chicklets) DO affect anarchists, also. How this can not be understood is more than I can fathom. It's these issues that can catalyze the type of momentum anarchists on this site always claim to be courting/desiring. If you ignore these cross-over issues, you remain insular and far less effective than you could be, imo.

Sorry dood but maybe they don't wanna become some low-rent NaturalNews knockoff? Not saying there aren't some very good arguments against Monsanto or Bayer, but they tend to be eclipsed by some very bad ones, and it's hard to blame thecollective for opting to err on the side of caution. @News has posted about this stuff in the past (specifically when the March on Monsanto leadership opted to make "ratting on every anarchist that shows up" an official policy).

Also, I'm not really one for "netiquette" but seriously, nobody online takes anyone seriously who whines this much about having their posts deleted. If it's happening this much you either have to adjust your writing or find a new place to post.

The shortest answer to Willow's general line of questioning is the level of conflictuality or "insurrectionary" character of the struggle. Even if you don't like that characterization, you can still ask if the structures of power would view it in that context and get your answer. If a struggle hasn't consisted of at least a few significant social ruptures or explicitly discusses politics that definitely aren't reformist at all, it's much more likely to get attention from anarchists, even if all they do is criticize it, which is often the case.

Sorry, I meant - if a struggle HAS consisted of significant ruptures, as was the case in standing rock, even though reformist narratives eventually won out.

One problem with hosting audio on youtube is that there isn't a way (that I know of) to add the podcast to a podcast aggregator via RSS feed, or any other means. I'd probably listen to it if that were a thing, since it's too much effort to pull this up on my phone, especially since I listened to the second episode and didn't find it super compelling.

"Sorry dood but maybe they don't wanna become some low-rent NaturalNews knockoff? Not saying there aren't some very good arguments against Monsanto or Bayer, but they tend to be eclipsed by some very bad ones..."

Sorry DOOD but the issue of the poisoning of our food supply and medicine go far beyond a "low-rent Natural News knockoff." Including these highly relevant subjects in the overall discourse on this site is real journalism and freedom of speech, rather than allowing only the "pet issues" version of anarchy that is currently being crafted here and at most of the other anarchist sites out there at the moment.

If you all were actually informed on this issue, you would understand that there are huge wins going on against the GMO/chemical/pharmaceuticals corporations, very anarchistic and leaderless in nature, and the opposition is growing. It is also being stamped out at every turn by these billion-dollar industries and the governments that are in their pockets. Sites like this should be supporting the opposition, and that is not happening.

Instead we have a bunch of Super Cool Anarchist Scenesters (TM) turning their noses up at the hard work of other human beings - yep, including those under your precious "anarchist" label like me.

Raising the issue of censorship is far from "whining." Having legitimate comments deleted here is bullshit, especially considering the absolute garbage that is allowed to stand. But yeah - let me just go away silently without a word like the overseers want.

I definitely won't waste my time here again. No worries there.

The thing is, that movement is not "anarchistic and leaderless". If it was it wouldn't be possible for leaders to call the cops on anarchists when they show up to their marches. This leadership is full of absolute opportunistic slimeballs, from the snake-oil salesmen to the blatant fascists and the rest of the "movement" is loathe to point it out. These "victories" that you speak of mainly tend to come in the form of laws and bans, usually put forward by nationailsts and authoritarians like Jobbik or Putin, who then get celebrated on social-media. Sorry, but that ain't "anarchistic".

I don't wanna come accross like an apologist for Monsanto, cuz I'm definitely not a fan, but I'm also old enough to remember a time when protests against them weren't completely dominated by yuppie fads, anti-science and crypto-fascists. I remember when they took over, and I remember when everyone else - even friends who are career organic farmers - started putting a lot of distance between themselves and these actions. It's a great case-study in recuperation, and a post-mortem is long overdue, but at this point there's really nothing there for us. The critiques of agriculture, domestication and intellectual property have faded away in favour of people who think pumpkin-spice lattes are making the frogs gay.

I'm someone that would like to see these discourses come together as they both have something the other lacks. Too many anarchists are way too comfortable with science as a whole as far as I'm concerned. The other guys are to spiritual and lack a no bullshit empirical edge. Then again the scientists aren't as no BS empirical as they think they are and are very much lost in their dialect(much like any knowledge priestly class). There is an enlightened no bullshit anti-science analysis that is necessary for a healthy anarchism just as there is a healthy spiritual disposition minus the bs.

Also, pretty much everything outside of anarchism is non anarchistic.

folks don't want to discover the anti-science approach to truth and knowledge. It's easy to find though. Some names: Richard Rorty, WVO Quine.

As though one has to reject the church and accept something in its stead rather than just muddle in a dark epistemology. Since there is no truth but what passes, everything is open to possibility, even beyond the black box of adequacy in science. Language and world beyond trivial notions of property naming is merely anti-realist and totally open to new negotiations. But we have no idea if we are getting closer to the way things are, in themselves (because we are not the things in themselves). Yes we can see observe, that the world is round, that there is some law called gravity that we take to be true come what may; but our theories refer to our words, and approximate reality only as an army of metaphors would; power (table thumping) is what defines truth. Thrasymachus was always already correct (cf. the republic).

Really, there is no way I'm saying that. I would never talk that much. Quine doesn't throw out the notion of truth caught up in naming properties. In the demonstrative index, the word captures the thing; the observation sentence is what he names this moment: gavagai...Beyond that there is just language, which is not the same as reality,
And everything is fallible. Truth at the level of non-triviality is anti-realist; prior to that it is realist, fixed, etc., because getting an understanding of what is meant is obvious. The cat is not by definition a "cat" but the term is fixed to refer in the sense that it cannot fail to semantically refer.

Thank god! Please help Emile! Please!!! They are about a decade into this site and has pretty much killed much of my love for it over the years because they just don't understand this very basic thing, where they are making language into something even worse than identity politics.

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.
Enter the code without spaces.