First Communique of the Individualists Tending Toward the Wild (2016)

  • Posted on: 28 January 2016
  • By: Chahta-Ima

“We love tranquility, we let the mouse play; when the forests whisper, we are unafraid”

Individualists Tending Toward the Wild (ITS, before “Individualities”), is the continuation of the eco-terrorist Project begun in the year 2011. After the death of “Wild Reaction” in 2015, we have decided to continue this project…


To refresh the memories of those who may have forgotten:
We continue this declared war against the Technological System, and against those who aim to improve and sustain it. We attack those who physically and emotionally insist on destroying and altering the wild and untamed places that are left

Our acts aim to terrorize, wound, mutilate, and kill these intended targets. We use threats, explosives, and firearms to accomplish our immediate objectives.

Those who work toward the destruction of Wild Nature deserve punishment, so that their acts will not continue with impunity. ITS is not a peaceful organization that petitions governments to “punish those responsible”, collecting signatures, and playing the absurd legal-juridical game. We aren’t an NGO. We don’t need intermediaries to clarify things. For those who threaten Nature there are no courts; and even if there were, we will still take the law into our own hands as our fierce ancestors did. As we are not interested in being a “vanguard” or being in the front lines of this war, we attack accepting the final consequences.


Those who have opposed us and our defense of Wild Nature have given us many names in the past:
- The civilized Aztecs before the arrival of the Spanish in Mesoamerica disdainfully called us “Chichimecas”.
- The Spanish after their invasion, more out of fear than condemnation, called us, “savage pagans”.
-The English whites after their arrival classified us as “hostile peoples”.
-Today, the hyper-civilized call us “terrorists”.

Even though we prefer to classify ourselves as an Eco-Extremist group, let there be no doubt that ITS is and continues to be a terrorist group. We identify with the Chichimeca Wars because we find valuable lessons in those bloody battles that our ancestors waged until their final deadly consequences.

We have tossed in the waste bin the rationalism and scientism of our first communiques. Now we rejoice in our pagan roots and we create gods from our personal dwellings in nature and from its cyclical processes.

Though we are not a tribe, we are individuals who have turned against modern progress, artificiality, and everything that attempts to mechanize and automate us.

To summarize, ITS is an eco-extremist group, formed by individualists opposed to modern values such as equality, humanism, and progresivism., as well as the moral foundations of the Techno-industrial system and its constant Progress.

ITS is the violent active response against those who aggressively cause imbalance in the Wild and Unknown, and look to domesticate them one way or the other.

ITS is a reaction, it is the logical consequence, a group of modern humans possessed by the primitive warriors of the past. We have decided to kill and meet out punishment to those who are directly responsible for the offenses against the Earth and those who dwell on it.


We are the same people who are responsible for leaving a UPVM worker maimed in Tiltitlan in our first attack. The same who left two techno-nerds gravely wounded at the Tec of Monterrey in Atizapán. The same who broke into the Cinvestav of Irapuato, the same who put a bullet in the head of a biotechnologist in Cuernavaca. The same who sent explosives to those hypocrites at Greenpeace, the same who wounded a professor of the UPP of Hidalgo with a car bomb. All that and more in 2011 alone.

We are the same people who sent a mail-bomb to the neurologists of the ITAM in Mexico City, which the authorities tried to keep quiet (among other acts) in 2012. We’re the people who terrorized the researchers of the IBT in Cuernavaca with a bomb destined to arrive at an institute belonging to the UNAM. We are responsible for the worker who was wounded stealing our package bomb from a mail box in Tlalpan in 2013.

Those who joined together from among a dozen groups to give life to “Wild Reaction” in 2014 are the same who decided to kill the project in 2015.

And we are the same people who now, in this year of 2016 according to the Gregorian calendar, continue the Extremist War dedicated to returning the blows that have landed on our wild places, and their flora and fauna.


We do not wish, nor do we seek, nor do we find it necessary, nor does it interest us to work for a “revolution”. We despise that term and deem it a non-existent goal. We attack in the present because that is all that there is. The attack in the here and now is what terrifies our selected targets.

We are not “revolutionaries”, nor anarchists, nor do we represent the radical left.

We are not primitivists; that deluded romanticist Zerzan does not represent us, nor does that deluded radical Kaczynski, nor does any gringo, Spanish, or Italian theorist. No one.

ITS represents only itself. We have created our own discourse-tendency. We have created our own concrete objectives and have formulated plans of attack in accordance with our positions.


We don’t distinguish between “good” or “bad” attacks in this war. We salute acts by groups who burn cars, those who detonate bombs in institutions that assist in destroying the Earth, as well as those who send mail bombs to blow up important people in populist and humanist organizations. We salute those who attack indiscriminately this compromised society, just as we rejoice in the arrows that pierce the bodies of loggers in the Amazon and surrounding places. It fills us with joy when tornadoes destroy urban areas, as well as when storms flood and endanger defenseless citizens. The same is the case when we see those who freeze to death in the cold winter, or when we see people wounded in earthquakes, for these are responses and reactions as well to the Technological System and civilization. We learn from nature and its violent reactions. Nature doesn’t stop when faced with subways, or rural or urban buildings. It doesn’t respect the common citizen or the scientific specialist. It is relentless, it destroys everything in its path without consideration for morality. With this, we are personifying in animist style Wild Nature, because in our pagan belief, nature is the Unknown Force of the first hunter with the same color skin as the earth, who with the first gatherer woman with braids of feathers, dances over the corpse of modernity and shakes the minds of those who feel in their gut the moribund beating of the Earth. They are dark beings with the characteristics of the Coyote and the Deer, with the scent of Moss and Mesquite, with eyes of Flame and Voice of Thunder; those that begot free man and woman, both wild, the same who have possessed our minds to continue on the war of our ancestors.

Our war is extremist and violent, in connection with the natural and joined to the spirits of the exterminated native tribes.
Those who we wound and kill are a blood offering to Wild Nature.

ITS has this warrior inheritance and we know others have it, so that:
Forward with the War against the Technological System and Civilization!
If they don’t respect the Earth, we won’t respect their lives either!
Death to Progress, Scientific Advances, and Modernity, the cancer that threatens our lives and wild surroundings!
Axkan Kema, Tehuatl, Nehuatl!
[Until your death or mine!]

First Full Moon of January
-Individualistas Tendiendo a lo Salvaje (Individualists Tending Towards the Wild). (ITS)



Now that is some hardcore strugglismo

God, they just keep getting stupider.

someone who wrote the wildernest. Why are they stupider? How are they not infinitely more interesting than anything going on in N. America right now. Maybe they aren't perfect, or "reify" nature or shit like that, but come with a critique or go home. Say something besides "stupider." Bring something to the table besides your fetishistic fusing of science and primitivism.

So that's your only yardstick? Your personal level of "infinite interest"? I'm a different poster by the way.

Is not exactly smart. The marrying of acivilizational theory and the scientific priestly class makes less sense then what these guys are doing.

Yer right! FUCK SCIENCE! I'm gonna go sarcrifice a virgin to my giant statue of Dad!

Are the only two options to chose from. It's not as if there have been anarchic societies that have practiced neither.

Coming from an anti-anarchist posting on an anarchist site who claims a pro-wilderness label but defends Science/Progress/Cities -in short-the very civilization that is destroying the wilderness.

And use it against the priestly powers, but to internalize the structure of the religion is akin to what Jacobi and company are doing. Primtivism can be quite stupid, but what he is doing is REALLY stupid.

Not "anti-anarchist." I've defended progress and cities?

You are on record in multiple places arguing against anarchism. In fact you argued for dropping the 'anarcho' from primitivism primarily because you were opposed to most basic anarchist outlooks.

As for cities and progress, I can only guess that that comment stems from your bizarre defense of Science. All humans from very early on in our story, used empiricism to some degree. To make the claim that hunter gatherers, either immediate return or delayed, were guided purely by superstition and various non-rational modes of learning is really strange. And you have equated science with empiricism which is entirely misleading and indicative of a personal and ideological agenda rather than a genuine desire to figure out the sources of domination and ecological destruction and possible ways of addressing them.

Science, with a capital s, is an ideology, it is the narrative by which authority claims a monopoly on truth. It requires urban living, in the sense of massified existences, because in small band societies there are no universities, libraries, books, test tubes, laboratories, experts in mathematics, experts in physics, experts in biology, experts in botany, propaganda networks that do the bidding of various special interests, etc., in short everything that Science relies on to exist.

Fair, if that's the meaning of "anti-anarchist" then fine. Weird label though.

I'm not going to argue with you about the science thing. It's clear that you've understood what I've written and just disagree. That's fine.

Actually, what is this: "To make the claim that hunter gatherers, either immediate return or delayed, were guided purely by superstition and various non-rational modes of learning is really strange."?

I've never said that. The exact opposite actually.

This would be a great stand up routine.

as social anarchist "organizing"

This communique sounds like something written by counter-intelligence government spooks or a 12 year old. Yes, I'm an ageist. Don't trust anyone under 30.

Actually I wouldn't be surprised AT ALL that these people are either intelligence spooks or mere cops. That probably would be a solid explanation as to why they are so convinced of never being caught and sent to jail and also why they so arrogantly reject any solidarity with insurgent anarchists...

Who else in Mexico is so immune to the prison system, save a few drug cartel leaders, than agents of the mafia government?

"To summarize, ITS is an eco-extremist group, formed by individualists opposed to modern values such as equality"
How can one be against equality? Is this sentiment something other than individualist elitism?

"It fills us with joy when tornadoes destroy urban areas, as well as when storms flood and endanger defenseless citizens. The same is the case when we see those who freeze to death in the cold winter, or when we see people wounded in earthquakes..."

Haha what? I worry these people are sociopaths.

Fuck civilization. Fuck not caring about people.

"fuck not caring about people"

how about fuck your empty rhetoric. There are over 7 billion humans on this planet. WTF do you do when a typhoon or earthquake hits, it doesn't matter fuck all whether you side with the people or the hurricane. your rhetoric of caring is annoying as hell. There is no way you have the mental capacity to care for 7 billion people, let alone trillions of trees and other organisms. "Fuck not caring about people," no, how about fuck the liberal anarchist who pretends they care about every single person in the world. Guaranteed you walk by homeless people on the street every day, same as we all do. Bet you have a couch, you taking them in? Fuck no, I'm not either, I live with enough anarchists who can barely pay rent.

The rhetoric of "caring about people" is tiresome. Even if we look at things in terms of quality of life, and not from an anthropocentric point of view, then some giant collapse resulting in huge human loss, could be considered a good thing if the value of good were determined by the quality of life of an individual. That being said, I could give a fuck about this, just showing you yet another way that you're making annoying and hollow and lazy arguments. There is nothing worse than lazy thought, and some of the worst of it is done by people who "care about people." Still hurt by 9/11 bro? those strangers dying in buildings make you tear up? Slaves mining in inner mongolia making tears in your cocoa pebbles? Or do you spoon them into your lazy thoughtless word projector you call a mouth still.

the internet is the pinnacle of human communication. dont let anyone tell you any different!

So is it just the rhetoric that bothers you ranty ranterson? What about those of us who attack AND care about people AND don't just talk about these things as abstract concepts?

Alright fine, let's be completely egocentric - nothing inherently wrong with that, let's not care about others except those with whom we have some sort of connection. If we're not to give arbitrary emotional value to the lives of others, why the fuck should we give arbitrary emotional value to a reified "nature"?

Alright wing nut. Your absurd interpretation of my comment, "fuck not caring about people", by which I meant "anarchists should feel empathy" (or anyone that's worth being around for that matter) if staggering.

Because I'm not interested in forming an ideology around indifference toward human life, I somehow am claiming the capacity to personally care for every living thing on earth? Or crying for the people that died in 9/11? What the fuck?

To be clear ITS stated that they feel JOY when random people (usually the poorest and most exploited) are KILLED by natural disasters. That makes me sick to my fucking stomach.

You're so desperate for a strawman that you can't see how stupid you reveal your own argument to be. Thank god I don't have to interact with people as pathetic as you in real life.

Against Equality is a sentiment that isn't as crazy as it sounds:

It's not something that exists in reality. Symmetry on the other hand is what anarchs should aim for.

so like... separate but equal?

( I hope you get syphilis.)

It's ziggy! With another pointless, semantic distinction which he mistakes for politics because he doesn't believe in ever actually doing anything. Look at me, I'm an "anarch"! I sit around and play word-games like a kid with legos and assume anyone gives a shit.

People aren't equal, obviously but they should treat each other as if they are, obviously.
If such basic respect is not freely offered, my advice is to reach out and take it.

There is a difference between equality and symmetry.

Ordinarily, I might agree. They're two very different words with very different meanings. Why, though, in this context, would you want to use the term "symmetry"? I'll grant that "equality" might not be the ideal term, but wouldn't "symmetry", with its emphasis on sameness, be worse in all of those regards?

Can also entail 60/40 ratios where differences are not one sided. Most of the data on male female domestic violence for instance is showing increased symmetry even though men on the whole initiate more violence.

See what happens when you engage him? Some neckbeard nonsense about domestic violence stats? "See?! Women can be perps too so my anti-feminism is totally cool you guys." Die in a fire ziggy.

Simply read the 1980 study. Also I am beyond gender based ideology.

For fuck's sake dude ... I know they do. You're completely fucking hopeless

You're one of those silly feminist ideologues who looses his shit over the very idea of gender symmetry. Listen silly ideologue, the fact is that an honest non ideological look at the data shows that there co perpetration of violence. Obviously the extreme forms of violence resulting in death or traumatic injury is where men tip the scales, but that does not account for the totality of IPV.

Go back to your silly wimins studies ideologue.

... are you serious right now? I said I agree with you ... what the fuck are you talking about?

I presumed you were the 'die in a fire' commenter.

I AM the same person, you're just too dim to follow a simple back-and-forth. You're a misogynist … that's why you think that domestic violence stats showing that women perp too (which debunks some old 2nd-wave rad fem nonsense that almost nobody believes anyway) somehow makes your misogyny justified. It doesn't but that's how you think because you're an idiot.

You don't really even read very well, you just argue with strawmen instead of paying attention.

You're the one throwing about the term misogynist in the usual leftarded way. I simply brought up the gender symmetry of IPV to illustrate a point of symmetry vs equality. There was nothing beyond that except what you want to read into it. Where in that point do you construe hatred of women on my part? Unless you are one of those leftist idiots who define misogyny as 'not feminist'.

is a beautiful expression of a multiplicity of unique singularities
indicating a patterning. According to cosmologists, symmetry is part of the fabric of space-time of
the universe. It is not a matter of Sameness, but a matter of one form of creative endeavor,
cosmic or otherwise. The issue then is the concept of "the unique". Uniques are special examples
of beings-as such: different, yet singular "examples" of that "this-ness" that we all are.
the opposite of a Tyranny of the Same. In the form of a union of egoists, ( M. Stirner)of a relational sort
that gather-together in various ways at various times, depending on the "situation".
These are the peoples that come-to-be, that and create their worldsto-be.(Delueze) ;Libertarians that in this way move
with intensity and creativity >experiencing, experimenting and yes at times collaborating with each
as one-another, wherever. "Spooks "in thought and behavior are under-mined , and praxes of import are fashioned. By definition there is therefore mutual regard and mutual aid with distinct respect
toward one's fellow uniques .at our best this is who we are and what we do in the ways we desire.
the best "tactic" is one like Bartleby(Melville) who just at the opportune time decides to refuse.
Recent examples include the utterance of "no project" in the 1968 manifestations in France,
the Tiananmen Square protests, particularly epitomized by that sole "unique, blocking the tank,
who articulated the essence of all participating :" we block you everywhere we can, because we can".; and Occupy when" No Demands" became the watchword. in all three movements, one spoke for the other,
whatever became the answer to the question "What do you want?", and whenever and wherever the groupescules desired. these are our "ideas"; these are our "sentiments", and these are our "activities", that express our eternal quest for the "coming community(ies)( Agamben) to which we joyfully aspire,
characterized and articulated in most creative and determined . now, "what's next?
let's see. the next happening.

Equality is simply Platonic Aristotelian identity in its hideous continuing orientational form. It's not the stuff of stars and snowflakes(and yes they are special). As emile says, there will always be an underlying relational deferring of forms too unique to be things made equal or non equal.

Difference and singularity are what drive intercourse at various levels of life and existence. The reification of equality is done by those damaged by slavery, segregation and leviathan who have lost any sense of beauty, self expression and owness.

Not only you're a pretentious pedantic tool, but also -therefore consistently- poorly educated. Socrates and especially Aristotle's essentialist and hierarchical political philosophies were contradictory to equalitarian ideals or any sort of social equity, so was their view on women's place in their ideal world, that's the lowest in documented human history.

Like emile I am pointing out how their overall epistemic framework(which has one over most of Western thinking) has given rise to spooks such as equality and justice.

Is not who we are. A better term would be exemplary . As examples
of our uniqueness as his own and as we express ourselves as sharing
In that thus-ness that we occupy. As witnesses to creation we gather
To be-together. To fashion our lives; to emerge from theThey
To follow our ways . This is not an intentional prossess. It is to participate
and co-rellate our personal and communal desires that happen to dwell
In our varying situations . We emerge, re-create, and recede.
our essence is our existence and our existence is immanent, relational,
And fullfilling as-such. An opportunity if we have that " courage" > to-be.

"People aren't equal, obviously but they should treat each other as if they are, obviously."

so people should be treated as if they are equal, even though they are obviously not? do you hear yourself? what the fuck does "equal" even mean? i am not the same as anyone else (despite that i may have much in common with many), why would i want to be treated the same? i want to be treated as ME, based on MY actions and behaviors; not treated as some spooky generalization of "human", based on ideological stereotypes etc. would you treat a 3 year old girl the same as you would treat her 40 year old pederast rapist? a crippled older black woman the same as a teenaged triathlete? a socialist the same as an individualist?

you must be a true believer in "do unto others as you would have them do unto you". i, on the other hand, would prefer to do unto others as they would have me do unto them. and vice-fucking-versa.

Do I hear myself? Yes. I do. Thanks. This isn't really an issue, obviously any idiot who can hold a thought knows that a rapist has disqualified themselves from the basic respect you give to strangers. Seems like you're trying to process your own struggles with semantics and mistaking that for something you need to explain to me?

And different. If equality does not exist then neither does inequality.

the only thing that doesn't exist is your persona, as you are being a complete fraud here.

We are all Frauds in the sense that we are not who we are
and are whom we are not. we can be authentic only if can admit
Our limitations and embrace our contingency with grace and humility.
Try that one on as you work-on Your "persona". and furthermore
Try to deal with your resentment . It is corrosive.

LoL.... And you're the one coming here all the time to spew your grandiose resentment against any form of anarchist action.

If you mean by that a carefully and "WellThought Out " crafted strategic "Plan" or "Plot"
with enumerated battle orders and with the usual suspects leading the charge?(CP,PLP,RCP


Western society is characterized by its penchant for 'categorizing' the 'uncategorizable' relational forms in the transforming relational continuum.

categorizing reduces relational forms to 'independent beings' by identifying the forms by way of 'common properties'. once we have reduce inherently interrelated relational forms to 'members of one or other category', then we can compare their properties and by giving our preferred values to different properties, assess the inferiority or superiority of the one category from the other.

as Poincare and others have pointed out, such reduction to categories involves flawed logic; i.e. one must assume the existence of the category prior to determining the membership properties, based on some representative members [which presumes the existence of the category]. this is 'circular reasoning'. circular reasoning is the only way to get to categorization.

if we see three tornadoes or three hurricanes, we can logically construct the categories 'tornadoes' and 'hurricanes', and once we have done this, we can identity each one directly and give it its own named identity on the basis of variations in 'common properties' (pressure, size, location, trajectory, life-cycle, velocity, etc.). in other words, we can cast aside the intuitively obvious understanding affirmed by Mach's principle, that all are interrelated and unique in themselves, NOT as 'independent entities' but in terms of their unique interrelations with one another and the dynamics of the habitat they are included in ['the medium is the message].

'there is nothing outside of context' [Derrida in language, and Bohm in modern physics].

"“The problem with English is that when it tries to grapple with abstractions and categories it tends to trap the mind into believing that such categories have an equal status with tangible objects. Algonquin languages, being for the ear, deal in vibrations [waves] in which each word is related directly, not only to process of thought, but also to the animating energies of the universe...
A few months before his death, Bohm met with a number of Algonkian speakers and was struck by the perfect bridge between their language and worldview and his own exploratory philosophy. What to Bohm had been major breakthroughs in human thought — quantum theory, relativity, his implicate order and rheomode – were part of the everyday life and speech of the Blackfoot, Mic Maq, Cree and Ojibwaj.” – F. David Peat, ‘Blackfoot Physics’

the problem is that most Western acculturated [Plato and Socrates conditioned] minds 'believe that categories are 'real'', and are not interested in introspection as to the tools one uses as a means of coming to understand what 'real' is.

genders become 'two different categories' only in the abstract process of categorization where we see things in terms of 'common properties' and forget about inherent interrelations within the transforming relational continuum.

I guess to me equality doesn't mean assimilation, it means the absence of hierarchy.
I take it for granted that anarchists understand equality to not automatically imply conformity or subservience and integration into some mass identity.

Then again I've never masturbated to Stirner so maybe I'm missing something?

Yeah exactly. It's not "equality" as enforced by some imagined authoritarian socialist power structure. You need to be a very specific sort of online "anarch" to immediately get all defensive when somebody brings up the simple idea of respecting each other until we have good reason not to.

You obviously haven't been paying attention to those leftards. They've taken the equality doctrine to absurd levels. There have been great minds that have believed in equality(Emma Goldman comes to mind), however the worst of these minds who believe in equality can be seen in the SJW leftist losers, and they're not exactly insignificant in the world today. Their language has helped to stink up a once great worldview in anarchism.

The issue is relational imbalance and asymmetry not equality/inequality. The best of the anarchists and more obviously the Stirnerians were always getting at the former not the latter.

Yeah ... I pay attention to the larger world instead, where actual important things happen? You know it? Everything you always drone on about is always tempest-in-a-teapot at most. As if the real problems of society are caused by a few overzealous SJWs.

Wait Ziggy, keep reading... I'm sort of agreeing with you and suggesting it's not that important.

SE, just when I think you might finally be saying something of value, you call people "losers"--you, the consummate loser!--and "leftards." It just makes me stop listening--like, seriously, is this a kindergarten playground? Who are you trying to bully--you, who has been bullied so much? Why do you do this?

"the simple idea of respecting each other until we have good reason not to."

if that is your definition of "equality", then you are creating your own; you are twisting language to your will - for which i give you far more credit than the content of said twisting. there is nothing about the term "equality" that implies your phrase quoted above, which i have no problem with.

Creating my own? Not really … there's a rich history of regular people using the term for centuries, along with egalitarianism. Just because a simple, good idea gets hijacked or misapplied by governments or legal systems doesn't mean I'm reinventing the wheel. It's actually a pretty obvious everyday social practice that is arguably a big part of the human condition, I sure as fuck can't take credit for it.

Oh God, that shit is even funnier and stupider than ITS.

Ayn Rand capitalists would also label themselves as such. Stephen Harper and his gang were also obsessively against equalitarianism...

you left out the best part:
"It fills us with joy when tornadoes destroy urban areas, as well as when storms flood and endanger defenseless citizens. The same is the case when we see those who freeze to death in the cold winter, or when we see people wounded in earthquakes, for these are responses and reactions as well to the Technological System and civilization."

sorry guys, but i'm pretty sure tribal people also freeze to death, and tornadoes existed before civilization began. durrrrrrrrrrrrrrrp.

But tribal death is somehow accepted, whereas modern Western death is feared and considered an evil against the civ dogma of the progress towards immortality. ( see cryogenics ) Cry on cold Western fear of mortal fate, thoust shall inevitably meet the glorious worm no matter how many transplants and botox you inject into your polluted souls!!

This is atrocious. Civil disobedience and even unlawful protest/assembly is one thing... but it should go without saying that this kind of thing shouldn't be welcomed around here (among a lot of other things, imo).

Hurting people and/or destroying their property is completely fucked up on so many levels. How can you call yourself an anarchist (and ITS doesn't even, btw they're just pretty much misanthropic terrorists/fascists) and support this kind of thing? It's basically authoritarianism masquerading as anarchist freedom praxis because 1: it violates the non-aggression principle and 2: imposes itself on others and, in this case, in the worst possible way.

I think it's about time we reconsider digging up the violence/nonviolence debate. Cuz look at what passes for quality anarchist media these days.

Are you serious ..? Is this person serious or trolling? That debate IS buried but using narcissistic nonsense that openly claims not to be anarchist is no reason to dig it up. I have my own version of the "non-aggression principle" with a couple of huge exceptions, like around "property" for instance.

I've definitely had to hurt more than people's feelings on occasion but these folks aren't anything but an example of extreme anti-civ nihilism. This isn't interesting because I envy these people's worldview … obviously?

cops on very high horses

"it violates the non-aggression principle"

Why aren't they out killing babies and blowing up hospitals? Punishment in the name of paganism, and you thought the nonviolence debate was old garbage. This is a new low. fuck all y'all. I'm gonna go take some antibiotics while i eat GMO cornsyrup and spray dioxin in your drinking water, because you disgust me. Seriously, if i see another one of these communiques i gonna start killing the earth. I'm gonna go burn a forest. Sell meth to previously uncontacted native tribes. Shit in your sacred springs. For every stupid action on the part of ITS, there will be a Fukushima. A methane leak. A Deepwater Horizon. And i will be doing this because ITS is so damn stupid, and so is everyone who declines to have a rational thought once a week.

Nonviolence IS old garbage. Or at least the old violence/nonviolence paradigmatic divide and false debate. Defensive and anti-oppression violence isn't a matter of debating whether legit or not, just as aggressive, unprovoked acts of violence upon random people out of some insane vindicative, compartmentalized resentment is equally not legit.

People new to anarchy should get clearly that those ITS Jokers are not anarchists, because what they advocate is among the shittiest, brutish imposition of MORALISTIC violence on others, and in so it is fully authoritarian.

Word on anarcho street is that ITS aren't even Mexicans but are in fact a bunch of Nth American anti-civ nihilists who just head down that way every now and then to cause mayhem cos it's much much easier to get away with that kind of shit there. Even heard hushed whispers that there are members of thecollective in ITS but not sure how much stock I put in those stories that I have overheard people telling in hushed tones at certain anarchist spaces.

Why should i care if they are not mexican? That sounds like some nationalist bullshit... No borders, right?

no borders is strugglismo so your point is invalid.

The anonymous "strugglismo" comments on this page and elsewhere on A-News lately seem like attempts at satirizing the anti-strugglismo analysis (from The Brilliant?) but come across more as butthurt whining.

That's how The Brilliant comes across too. Oh, we forgot masturbating. Whiny butthurt masturbating.

Can you give specific examples demonstrating where there's butthurt and whining on the brilliant?

If one isn't for strugglismo, one is a butthurt whiner? Wow, how informative.

Yeah, you're right. I was just being kind of a dick. But I think we can all agree that those fine folks at The Brilliant are ALSO guilty of at least that. But definitely not intended as a real critique. I enjoy their work actually, even though I'm definitely the "strugglismo" bro they're perpetually taking the piss from.

The hosts of the The Brilliant don't concern themselves with silly leftist strugglismo bullshit, they are too busy negating the left by hosting a weekly podcast and holding "spirituality" workshops at bookfairs.

Smashing windows = Strugglismo
Sabotaging oil pipelines = Strugglismo
Podcasts = Anarchy!
Attending an anti-fascist march = Strugglismo
Bookfairs = Anarchy!
Buying land to rewild on = Anarchy!
John Zerzan = Strugglismo
The explicitly anti-anarchist group "Individualists Tending Towards the Wild" = Anarchy!
Spirituality = Anarchy!
Science = Strugglismo
Burning cop cars = Strugglismo

"Strugglismo" ... trying to keep up with all the new hip anarchy phrases is tiring. I'm not even sure what the fuck that is suppose to mean, or is that point? To have meaningless ready made turds to sling at each other?

"Strugglismo" is a term invented by people involved with this site to mock people who believe in furthering or participating in struggle, a cause, or a movement--which they regard as a reiteration of leftism, activism, or whatever--instead of...well, it's unclear what opponents of strugglismo are _for_ because they're characteristically afraid of taking positions other than "against." So usually the response in kind is to mock them for apparently focusing on anarchist subcultural efforts.

"Strugglismo" is the latest insult in the tradition of "lifestyle anarchism." Fuck Bookchin and fuck his successors; whichever direction you point the weapon of name-calling, you're still an asshole and an obstacle to worthwhile discussion. The critique of activism is important, sure. But the critique of doing anything in the world besides being a dog in the kennel of a certain obscure book publisher is ... not so important.

What in the fuck does "strugglismo" have to do with Bookchin or lifestylism? If anything, strugglimso would be right up his alley as a boring old leftist who spent pretty much his entire life immersed in movement politics and who is now chiefly known for his influence on the Kurds (the ultimate strugglistas). The "lifestylists", on the other hand, are the ones now accusing anyone who does or cares about anything of "strugglismo".

So what? Is Strugglismo that anarchist version SJW? The debased discourse seems to suggest so. When I first came to this site so many awful years ago, it was still the usual crypto-stalinist this, workerist that and then there was a little bit of fish and pig fucking being slung about, but at least those were straw-men that could be easily debunked (bestiality aside). Strugglismo is just kind of blah. Yeah I believe in struggle because I'm an anarchist. What's your point? If you don't believe in struggle, then are you just an anarchist to pat yourself on the back? What actions/activities fall under non-strugglismo and that are out of the norms/put themselves in opposition to that of the dominate society?

Until I know, I can't yet be insulted. Because It's like a pompous right-wing troll not only calling you an extremist, but one that wants to undermine society's capitalist and christian values. It's not an insult because it's true.

Also, is it pronounced strug-lismo or strug-glismo? Not sure if the silent G would apply in this hybrid.

Yup, I also heard word some members worked as pole dancers i.e. ancap entertainment, very hypocritical!

LOL cool conspiracy theory bro

If the femwhinists pole-danced in a TAZ free of charge, no problemo, I'm amoral ;)

For fuck's sake, why does Thecollective keeps allowing reactionary misogynists like this commenter to post here.

Non-sectarianism really?

Anyways if they still do, just wanna remind the complete assholes here -including LeWay- that they can post their spite just because those "Totalitarian Leftards" are allowing them to do so. Here's for your chauvinist pride.

Well if people with grudges over critiques of the left can just slander someone bu posing as and posting as their account...

I've even seen emile's account get jacked.

That's just a cheap and dirty trick that wont end up stopping any of us from critiquing semantic reality...

I take calling feminists "whiners" as a valid, intelligent, articulate critique of the Left, and not a cheap, dirty trick. Thank you, hypocrite poser.

is it possible that one could be an anarchist but not a feminist or vice-versa?

There are things that anarchism can learn from feminism(just as there are some things to learn from the more egalitarian half of that mens thing) but generally its a good idea for anarchism to not be tied to ANY ideology gender or otherwise. The latter is generally the rule among feminists. There are more Hillary voters among feminists by far then feminists/anarchists.

Let's not forget that classical feminism was on the other side of anarchist positions at certain points(the white feather movement for eg).

many points, actually. can i get a YEAH for suffrage!

is it possible that one could be an anarchist but not a feminist or vice-versa?

it depends on how you define both terms. if you define anarchist as merely someone against the state and capitalism, then of course, even in theory you could not see how gendered roles feed into that. and of course in practice people don't abide by what they say they believe in on the regular.

if you define feminist as someone who merely wants women to share more equally in the shit pie, then of course that doesn't address the fundamental power dynamics of society the way that anarchists say they want to.

but there are definitely anarchists and feminists who take things further than the above, and who, explicitly or not, overlap significantly.

Word on anarcho avenue is that ITS is just COINTELPRO aimed at dividing anti-civ tendencies.

Oh good information Officer... wait I didn't get your last name... what was it again?

at least this proves it is the height of ameri-centrism to say that the miserable young nihilist elements of the USA scene are the stupidest and most pathetic expressions of the new nihilism.

Looks like these crazies would love to have a job at some ICBM silos. So you can thank Dawg that Mexico has no nuclear arsenal... but what happens if hipster fans of the Brilliant get positions in the Pentagon? NSA where are u?

Are anews commenters intentionally contrarian or just incapable of nuanced thoughts?

Can we not find that ITS' complete lack of concern for human life disgusting, but simultaneously affirm war against civilization without dogmatic non-violent hang ups? Indiscriminate killing and the destruction of property and infrastructures have nothing in common. Regardless of my personal feelings on targeted assassination, even that is different.

But instead, yall create this dichotomy between civil disobediance or anything goes.

And theres still room for an anarchist critique of equality without the conclusions ITS go to..

I, for one, would love to up the level of discourse around here. Seems to me that there's a certain level of misanthropy that's just unsustainable. I'm no nihilist at all but certainly not a pacifist either, the problem with a lot of the comments here is that these are people who would never act on their position anyway, doesn't even occur to them that they should. They think having opinions while sitting at home IS a praxis, so the analysis around direct action is weak.

There's a huge spectrum between activist ritual and ITS practice that should be explored by anti-civ militants.

what is such a big deal that's driving supposed anarchists so nuts? it's along the lines of leftists stopping anarchists from breaking windows when perhaps they should instead be throwing a few bricks themselves. if anarchists want to go after anyone for mass murderous stupidity, there are many bigger targets to aim ire.

Ha! You're honestly mystified as to why this ITS rhetoric gets a reaction from people? Even supposed radicals? I mean ... it's written to get a big reaction, it has to be intentional.

Raising the quality of discourse here would require account-based postings. Something that the admins are stilk reluctant to even try doing temporarly.

The problem is that what one commenter means by raising the quality of discourse means lowering it for someone else.

The etiquette and conversational skills might be improved with certain rules/procedures/requirements initiated by thecollective, but the quality of the comments is not directly or exclusively related to politeness or dialogue intelligence.

Example: Questioning feminism, leftism, organization, pacifism, technology, Science, progress and cities equates for some anarchists as misogyny, misanthropy, reactionary, profoundly stupid, romanticism of the primitive, etc. While for others these are essential critiques to be made and fleshed out if anarchism is to adequately address domination in all its forms and identify the obstacles-belief systems for instance-to the realization of anarchy.

I think the trolling, one line sarcasm, repetition, insults, etc are largely to do with the medium and to a lesser degree the general state of specifically american anarchism which seems dominated by celebrities and scenes and reactions to this fact (or fiction?).

Not to mention the myopia of the internet where so many people can get so ego-invested with just endlessly discussing things ... until some delusional jackass actually manages to convince himself that while he's "critiquing feminism" to no-one in particular, on some obscure website that nobody reads who isn't already well versed on the topic ... this jackass honestly thinks he's performing an "essential critique" to "adequately address domination" presumably coming from the identity-politician-industrial-complex ... instead of just rationalizing his tendency to say asinine shit in public forums.

But mostly I agree with you.

Having accounts would not help the "quality if discourse" and presents only security risks. Disabling comments alltogether would require people to put time and effort into their critiques to warrant new posts, instead of kneejerk reactions in the comment section.

"But instead, yall create this dichotomy between civil disobediance or anything goes."

Ive bwen on @news for years and seen more kinds of stupid and crazy bullshit than i ever imagined. Not once, ever, have i come across even a single post which argued for nonviolence/civil disobedience as an exclusive stategy. Ever. Literally nobody here is against ITS because "violence". Stop trying to sound "nuanced". You're not.

This is an above comment:

"This is atrocious. Civil disobedience and even unlawful protest/assembly is one thing... but it should go without saying that this kind of thing shouldn't be welcomed around here (among a lot of other things, imo)."

So try reading before you say stupid shit.

Is there any proof that any of these violent acts ever occurred in Mexico? My guess is ITS is COINTELPRO sending out fake communiques.

Have you never read anything previously, or are you just trying to propagate discontent? Or, is it too hard to click a few buttons with so much information at your fingertips?

Check the source of those communiques. You could research from there. There are plenty of news articles talking about them, showing crime scenes, security policy changes at the uni where the nano tech professor they killed worked. There are articles about how the Mexican govt has brought in Europol to track them down.

Whoa.. Why ITS writings are posted on the Anarchist Library? They openly claimed not being anarchists and seemed rather hostile towards anarchist groups, even those beyond the Left.

Is this an-ploitation or what? I think we should pressure Anarchistlibrary to remove this shit, as it's completely making anarchists a bad name.

I am not totes opposed tho. Especially cuz of this gem:

Pro-pedophilia essay by a left communist who is also hostile to anarchism. TAZ is one thing, this is NAMBLA-level.

Oh shit... I didn't know Dauvé was also part of the NAMBLA club.

Boy-lover I guess? Very sub-trendy among the radical upper castes... get ass-raped by a mature men when you're a young impressionable boy, then become a Post-Marxist. Ancient Greece did not die, it just moved and went into dress-up games.


To promote this shit is fucking terrible. I was a bit abused as a child and do have a share of pederastic tendencies, though I'm never going to promote this shit, because I understand this is sickness.

Maybe you should try writing something (beyond a brief a-news comment) arguing that anarchist media shouldn't provide space for ITS, including reasons, substantiation, and citations from their writing. Speaking personally, I don't give a fuck about this group and find their writings really boring and barely readable. Therefore I have no idea why they would or wouldn't belong on anarchist websites. I bet lots of other people are in a similar boat and their shit is generally accepted simply because people are used to seeing it on this site and others but don't bother to read it, much less question. If you have something to tell everyone, go ahead and say it, just do it more convincingly than this.

Ok, thanks!

"...the same is the case when we see those who freeze to death in the cold winter, or when we see people wounded in earthquakes, for these are responses and reactions as well to the Technological System and civilization. We learn from nature and its violent reactions."
Well then...

Also, "free man and woman" your imported colonial binary is showing.

Also, though opposing the Aztec civ is a step up, not explicitly attacking all hierarchy and domination is sketchy.

Also, although I dig distancing oneself from stagnated ideas and egocrats, their praxis is def informed by Uncle Ted not to mention they are a part of an ongoing global discourse that has formed contemporary anti-civ thought and conceptions of wild nature and reek of being influenced by this discourse.

lol, the ressentiment is so desperate and strong in this one that he thinks "opposing the Aztec civilization" is a "step up." i bet your body is a pasty angst stew and i hope you feel better one day soon.

ITS mail me some peanut butter and jelly sandwiches!

Where's Rydra and that dipshit Squee to weigh in on this conversation?

sooo many comments, no chance to read it all.
except "offering blood to the nature" (if they write it literally, it is a primitive habit), all the rest is good written. I like they made separation from gringo colonists and their influence, and I like this:
We are not “revolutionaries”, nor anarchists, nor do we represent the radical left.
We are not primitivists; that deluded romanticist Zerzan does not represent us, nor does that deluded radical Kaczynski, nor does any gringo, Spanish, or Italian theorist. No one.

First off, I presume these guys don't know what it is to be freezing to death at minus 45 centigrade, which is probably as painful as burning alive. Doubled with the idea that they are defending this complete privileged carelessness which makes homeless people die outside in the cold as they enjoy their posh living in their fucking communal lofts... hipster crap. So typically capitalist.

While native cultures were not based on the fear of death like this society’s dominant/normative culture is, they neither did glorify it like some a negative shadow image of a moral value, just like those ITS edgy-ass dogs are. Many primitive and native cultures actually spent a lot of time and devotion mourning the dead, in some instances for weeks. The moral violence of loss was answered by a building and sharing of meaningful reparation among communities. Losing someone wasn’t some cold, mathematical, expeditive business like... you know what.

So yes, mass society make any individual’s life insignificant (unless he-she become targeted as enemy of Law and order and public morality, but just like in any celebrity relation, it’s never for who you really are as a person, always just for a bogeymen forcibly applied on you). That’s one of the reasons why I’m so deeply, ferociously against it as an anarchist, and why those ITS phonies aren’t being very good actors in that movie, or just not well-scripted... They read to be as botched as Poe Dameron’s character in Force Awakens, therefore they may be some stunt by statists.

Still looking for something original with them in comparison to other death cults, satanic ritual murderers, jihadists. These people may have been ass-raped when they were too young, then their mind has been probably broken forever. Not that I ridicule people who suffered this experience, I actually feel bad for them... But basing your worldview, theories, desires and morality on this? It’s just doing what the oppressors inherently wanted you to lower yourself down to, not breaking apart in any way from their system of domination, that is fundamentally destructive to dignity, liberty and LIFE.

Make no mistake... I’ve been the victim of parental violence and abuse as a child, but at the same time it makes perfect sense to me to NOT be promoting this mindless interpersonal violence fueled only by resentment and the eternal quest for more domination and desecration of other persons.

Still waiting for a non-anarchist insurgent theory and action which worships and glorifies the living, especially its dignity, beauty, diversity, fragility. I don’t see it in ITS. I see only another resentment and machismo-driven death worship.

(Actually not really waiting for it... as I know anything coming from authoritarians will always be dogshit... always was... forever will be dogshit)

Aside from this, I couldn’t care less that these people have an actual body count or are any lethal... they’re still hundreds of corpses away from rivalling with any of the Mexican drug cartels and their associates in the CIA/DEA. As long as they keep killing workers or even scientists that have little power over the system, we’re sure their struggle will never gain any seizable might.

But if anyone reading this is involved in, I think you’d better remove their text(s) from it.

my answer on this comment:
they are not trying to seize any might.
"These people may have been ass-raped when they were too young, then their mind has been probably broken forever. "
this discredit your opinion in total. you hate militants and your pacifism never changed anything, in American sense, you are a looser. while governments use violence, we may not stay pacifists.
I am agreed only that killing scientists will not change anything, but it is their choice who will be their target, even killing a cops will not change anything, but some people do it and I can't say they should not do it just because one cops less is not bringing revolution. any damage to the system is useful, is it cop, his car, his window, his house, his daughter scientist, it doesn't matter, servants of the system (of billionaires) should be damaged in any way somebody finds it appropriate. sabotaging bulldozer is not a revolution but it is necessary and useful (capitalists are crazy for money, any financial damage kick them in their heart), much better than to "wait" million years for revolution.

I don't think your understood that part of my comment. Reading it back it seems rather borderline homophobic and not pacifist. But the intent was to ridicule how morally fucked up these people appear to be judging by their bloodthirsty authoritarian rhetoric of morally broken people. I have no problem with the use of violence and am not supporting the violence/nonviolence dichotomy. In my opinion the very reason many societies have fallen to totalitarianism is because people have delegated the role of political violence to the police and other State agency, while it should have always been in their very own hands. Many anarchists not just in North America are still suffering of this refusal to "grab the sword" and incorporate it to their daily lives, where the Warrior no longer is cast in the fantasy world.

I've been wanting to watch that video ever since it was released... anyone know a work around to watch this through Tor?

Also in the same vein, here is a translation of a claim for a parcel bomb which ended up injuring two GMO lobbyists in Mexico city. (I tried publishing it here as content in the past, to no avail, as some of you would be happy to know.

Awesome shit... Thanks. But these people are openly anarchists, so they just beaten ITS at their game.

I guess the only way to view YT through Tor without the javasnitches would be with some Flash download add-on, though several Firefox add-ons have been proven to not be safe at all, a few others are malware...

I find it really funny when anarchists and leftists look at something like ITS and think they must obviously be spooks who are trying "to divide us". Like seriously are you actually doing anything, how delusional do you have to be? Like your infoshop and podcast are gonna smash capitalism and the state any day now sure. Or any "masses" are going to follow you like you're the Pied Piper as long as you don't say too many crazy things. Yeah cuz that would so happen.

Yeah, COINTELPRO is all about dividing the Anarchist News comboxes. That's exactly what they're about.

Back in 2012, leftists tried the same trick, putting together "documents" and crap, even throwing in Gustavo Rodriguez as a secret service agent. The whole thing was pitiful, if you search for ITS (those leading the charge) you should find stuff about that, only in Spanish though, i believe.

Pied Piper, lol

I did a little search to reminisce... i forgot they had also included Ted Kaczinsky in their conspiracy theory. Alex Jones would be envious...

the ITS conspiracy:

Unabomber pruebas de que fue un montaje mediatizado, sospechas de que las ITS son una estrategia similar.

Respuesta a las ITS, grupo de “anarco insurrecionalistas” y supuesto FLT-FLA. Invitación abierta. (es/en)

and responses:

Teorías de conspiración y lxs ridiculxs “saboteadorxs” / Nota por Liberacion Total

2° Pronunciamiento conjunto de los grupos anarquistas insurreccionales y eco-anarquistas de México

I cant remember if any of this stuff was translated... also at some point Gustavo Rodriguez weighed in and got accused of being a CIA agent, some of that stuff is on Culmine if i recall.

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.
Enter the code without spaces.