Topic of the week: There are no tech solutions to social problems

  • Posted on: 4 January 2016
  • By: thecollective

We have covered this topic a few times before but it bears repeating. The solutions that technology gives to social problems rarely solve them and usually come with unforseen consequences. Let's look at the current brouhaha around PB as a case in point. For starters PB has never had an account on @news (which is done here). Additionally Drupal gives @news the option to "write in" a username which PB and many other users take advantage of as a way to have conversations over time.

In the case of PB this means that they are not the sole author of posts under the name "Post Biceps." I would guess 2-3 others use that name, mostly to make fun of PB. It's very funny (ha ha) but extrememly hard to moderate against, especially because we do not store IP addresses.

The flip response to this information (which we'll try to post as part of an FAQ) is to end anon posting, ad hoc posting, etc. While we are sympathetic to the criticism that there would be a higher level of conversation if anon* posting was removed, we still believe that the role of anon posting is 80-90% important. The unforseen consequences of removing these kinds of comments can easily be seen on other @ websites. They create internet dead zones or cliques so obscure and unapproachable that they appear to be talking just to themselves.

The open question for us here is "Why do anarchists continue to rely on crass tech solutions to social problems?" Obviously the example above is tempting here but the general problem is the way that the Internet has changed our social lives, both by limiting it (largely to a screen) and by making it seem so much more ubiquitous (always in our pocket). This is officially a big problem, for us-as-a-website but more for us-as-anarchists-who-value-f2f.

The future will not be easily structured, or worse, if it is easy, it will likely be because people turn to the Facebooks, Googles, and phone apps, not little operations like @news. In the 1990s anarchists built infrastructure (Indymedia, Riseup,, etc) that attempted to challenge this upcoming threat. These only partially succeeded before being nearly entirely washed away by the torrent of social media.

Our question this week is how can we think of social solutions to social problems. Clearly there are some tools to remove toxic people from public boards (and we moderators are in no way defending toxic individuals who we are largely happy to remove) but we recognize that virulent toxicity is more powerful than a mere IP address ban or account removal. How can we live more of our life off of the Internet and use this forum as a pleasant way to survive our cubicle, our tram ride, or a quiet moment among friends. How can we, together, properly call a tool a tool and not conflate every jerk with our very core identity?


90% of 'comments' here are mudslinging rants from anonymous posters who are not attempting to make any points at all.

"Fuck you you fucking primmie!", etc. etc.

I am glad you are considering doing something about this farce. I hope you don't go in the wrong direction.

not "missing" the point, you're taking the point and turning it on its head
the point of the post is that admins *can't* fix these problems. we're thinking about them all the time (which is our role as admins, right?). and these are problems that are not within our capacity to fix, at least not without changing the site beyond recognition. did you read the headline?

but to repeat (*again*), posts that are just empty name-calling are supposed to be removed (if they're not it's our mistake). if they're not removed and we've seen them, we leave them because there is *some* other point also being made, even if we disagree with it, even if we think that it's inarticulate and/or confusing.

But it's like... what I suggest in another thread, that siply removing anon commenting and making it registration-based would spare you of all the efforts of removing each and every single toxic comment, no?

Of perhaps you may instead change the settings towards all comments being sent to "pending for approval", so that you only have to post the comments that aren't obnoxious toxic crap and keep the rest in the trash. Addtionally, this would help makign commenting safer as the timestamp would probably no longer represent the time when they were posted. giving you the links and timestamps for all the "suck my ****" -type posts, but there are some on this very thread, rather amusingly.

And if you're saying I've missed the point because you've already decided that you're not going to make any changes, then what is the point in this thread? It would become a non-news thread.

"Tram ride"? Sounds like "the collective" is a bunch of Brits! ;)

Seriously, though, since you brought up the 1990's, how about bringing back the '90's model of focusing on creating and networking info shops/social centers? Having these kind of public indoor spaces for anarchists (and their friends) to meet is a great way to encourage more face to face socializing and bringing new people into the fold.

Just because a website doesn't have a comments section doesn't make it a 'dead zone'. Ask some of the bigger counter-info sites about the traffic they get at their sites, think you would be surprised - they get way more fucking traffic than @-news, trust me. It's not the 90s anymore. Nobody wants to interact with a bunch of shit talking trolls. The 'lulz' ended long long long ago. People want to read news, action reports in particular. I think 99% of the world have had quite enough of opinions from white people living in North America regardless of whether they are anarchists or not, their opinions are not that fucking important let alone interesting that they need to be plastered all over every article. Drop the comments altogether. There is already a forum on here - let the shit talkers use that and let's get on with the fucking show.

And, well, I appreciate counterinfo sites, or totally want to rep things like, but I like @news the most. Maybe because I am one of those opinionated white North Americans, it's quite possible. But it seems that some of the convos that happen here are actually interesting... I have read comments that have changed my thinking about things, I've had to refine my own ideas when I've got in some pissing match with someone, I've even appreciated comments that have provided hyperlinks to related conversations or even provided real-time updates. (This is over the course of 8 years of reading.)

Commentless sites are cool. But I like this site BECUZ it has comments. Again, if it ain't yer thing, that's cool, but it's not like space is scarce here in internet anarchyland. There can be different sorts of sites.

"It's not the 90s anymore.

"It's not the 90s anymore. Nobody wants to interact with a bunch of shit talking trolls. The 'lulz' ended long long long ago."

No it didn't. Lulz.

But srsly, what's this whole Facebook thing if not interacting through the internets with a bunch of shit-talking trolls? Fedbook has, to that regard, beaten previously-established records in term of shit-talking. Not even IRC was so filled with rampant hate and desecration, as I was banned all the time from channels over posting intentionally-obnoxious trolling for the funs. In other words, chit-chatting over the nets has remained more or less to the same ratios of crap vs intelligence, but perhaps slightly went further down general idiocy and especially sociopathy (like online racism and misogyny).

So sure... yeah, remove commenting from any anarchist site, then you'll have anarchists going even more to Fedbook to snitch themselves and each other.


(Some tech guy at the NSA nods... yet stil can't manage to solve the comment order being messed up on this site ;)

Yep, it has gotten horrible trying to post comments on A-news. Most of topics are just so full of trolls' pathetic comments, that virtually kill off any communication there could be.

If y'all are actually looking for ideas, and not just pushing the usual primmie line that the internet is ruining everything, there are some things you could try if you're willing to experiment.

- Keep anonymous posting, but eliminate ad hoc posting.

- Try the reddit approach, which means eliminating anonymous posting, but making accounts so ridiculously easy to create that people don't mind making throwaways.

- Keep IP addresses for just the useful life of the post, which depending on your definition of "useful" would be 0 - 48 hours. IP addresses are a bad way of identifying users tho, maybe save this one for if you get really desperate.

- Moderate comments based on content, according to strict published rules. This the approach taken in the syriancivilwar subreddit, where supporters of the YPG, KRG, regime, various rebel factions, Turkey, Russia, and even a handful of ISIS fanbois all congregate and argue. The result is draconian to the point of fascism, but it maintains the board as a useful source of information and discussion about the war without degenerating into a mudslinging contest.

- Post the kind of useful and engaging content that will stimulate informed, articulate discussion. Yeah, pretty much just kidding myself here...

Seconded, fo the first bullet point.

what is "ad-hoc posting"?

that i don't know. usually 'ad-hoc' means the devices communicate between each other without a server/router. afaik this has nothing to do with anews and i've only heard it referenced in relation to handhelds (using cellphones as walkie-talkies instead of connecting to a cellphone tower, for example). all of the posting on anews goes through the webserver though, so i'm not sure what ad-hoc means in this instance.

Bureaucrats use it to indicate unofficial bodies or procedures, which doesn't really help here of course. OP sorta kinda seemed like they meant the practice of tacking a random user name to otherwise anonymous comments, but that's not really clear either.

This might sound stupid but what about limiting the comments based on volume? Is there some way to do that? Egoist, nihilism has it's place in the real world because every single significant event doesn't have 3 or 4 arrogant jackasses with autism-spectrum or acute narcissism assuming everyone gives a shit what they think.

What's the online equivalent to dealing with the one guy who won't shut up at the meeting and everyone's checked out but he doesn't even notice and just keeps talking and talking?

Online? that's easy. Don't feed the trolls. JUST DON'T READ IT. rl is the more difficult situation.

"Don't read it" sounds easy, but in practice it has never worked to shape the discussions that occur here. The trolls have power. That's just a fact. You can blame us for it, but you know what we anarchists say about social systems that would work if only everyone were "good" enough for them...

Who is forcing you to come here? Who is forcing your eyeballs to read the comments that you don't like?

Grow a spine, and take some personal responsibility.

Look, I (and probably the majority of the other users) are always on the verge of quitting using a-news. Many people already have. If you don't want to be one of the last people left using it--and for there to be one less widely used space of anarchist dialogue and information--you should be able to see the value of engaging with why we often quit, or wish to.

No one is forcing anyone to do anything, but if you *wish* for us to be here, it's worth thinking about. If you don't, we can commence looking for another site to use, and ditch this one, and attitudes like yours.

What is the real world solution? Stop going to meetings you don't care about.
What is the online equivalent? I think we can all connect the dots.

So you're either trolling or an idiot. Didnt say I go to meetings I dont care about, said every gathering of people has to deal with loud-mouths, sooner or later.

The flaming stupidity and pretension of the trolls parasiting this site is far from being identifiable with volume as a measure. Azano and SE for an instance are know for their short -yet shitty- posts.

flaming, stupid, pretentious, parasitic trolls are so shitty.

and how about the "parasiting this site" troll?? is this like, your table??
up against the wall, owner

No I don't own this site, Mr. Douche, but that is a site for anarchists, not reactionaries, TPs, national-anarchists and other anti-anarchists who ARE indeed parasiting this site, as they are not coming here with any respectful manner or constructive intents.

let's try not to conflate the irreverent destructive with the reactionary authoritarian.
the onus of constructive intent is on the autonomist
your exhibited mean-spirited put-downs are rather incidentally, reactionary authoritarian.
so get fucked, comrade-hypocrite.

I think the person you are responding to has it exactly right, and you are just whining with big words. Explain to me why not granting space to "national anarchist" scum is "reactionary authoritarian." Do you defend Klan rallies on the grounds of "free speech"?


That's true and ziggy and azano are definitely obnoxious, don't really like emile's rambling essays but he's more of a big dork with an etymology fetish, harmless enough. My point wasn't length of posts, more like who spent several hours replying to almost every second post on the entire site, blanketing @news with their stupid gibberish.

I'm not even completely opposed to tolerating (while condemning) a certain amount of vile, 3rd positionist shit as a reminder of the screwed-up, myopic world we live in but anyone can simply be talking too much. Statistically more likely if they also happen to be an egoist but if everyone just tries to post quality over quantity, that goes a long way with me.

Absolutely, but there's an anti-tech soution to the problem of society.

(registering this for the One-Liner Comment of the Year!)

There's a nuclear solution to the problem of society, too. Given society's self-destructive streak (climate change, toxic pollution, famine, war, etc), the way that was phrased you could as easily say there is a social solution to the problem of society. Apocalypse is the cure to what ails. But that tells me nothing.

As regards the topic, having some programming and admin experience, I can't really see a code difference fixing the problem without completely destroying the usefulness of none account/anon commenting. Besides the security culture concerns, sure internet (anews) is a free association, but the point where you are trying to mandate accounts (citizenship) is the point where it starts to lose it's anarchist character. Don't stop people from talking because sometimes other people run up and start screaming.

How is the nuclear "solution", or any other man-made apocalypse, anti-tech?

in the given context that "Tech" is anti-social, it would follow that a social solution is therefore anti-tech. no?

What is not "social" with technology? Ok... perhaps there is some advanced technology that's been kept secret for a small elite of people (as in the "Breakaway Civilization" conspiracy theory), but if you look at all that can be deemed as "technology" around you, it's all there to enforce mass social enslavement to a grid of control through commodity.

The problem lies with your definition of "social", which indeed is a somewaht ambiguous in itself. When I talk "social" I talk about the social relationship, which in the present context is at the level of mass production. But of course, a social club of sorts an be near-completely removed from technology if it wants to.

I'd be up for this one.

let's call it anonymous or the invisible committee or or anarchism or Nothing, just unmitigated society.
Tech relegates privilege to it's assumed author and subordinate constituency.

"Tech relegates privilege to it's assumed author and subordinate constituency."

Whew! Just came back from reading that to the lady at the counter at TIm Horton's and she went on a riot, fucking up the whole place than kissing me on the lips and then the Insurrection went on. It's like... those delicious words of you are so explosive for the Existent!

(...or really just debilitatingly unsubstantive? I don't know which one)

nice stereotypes you have there

Agreed with the latter, technology and society are such broad words that saying "technology is anti-social" could mean 100s of different things, and saying it tells me nothing. For example: Are you against technologies like doors and windows? Do you like freezing in the winter? Is not freezing in the winter anti-social?

Segments of society make bombs that they drop on other segments of society. Therefore technology allows society to be anti-social. But since society is the cause, we should be anti-social to stop the anti-social society. Aw fuck it.

Are not the same thing. One of these things does not actually exist. Should be obvious which one that is.

Yes, social doesn't exist since it's an adjective and not a noun.

Nothing is important!

Represented by the adjective exist. The other thing is just a definition representing an abstract body.

relations is all there are. no local body ever exists. all perception is abstract.
society is an illusion which occurs wherever 2 or more gather
betta recognize


so, where does fascism occur?

is it all but a dream? then, to take the power back, we got to first believe in the meaning of a dream. the essential nature of all things is in the never-world of dreams. the forest exists for trees/we live in fascist society. humdeedumdeedee-technology&me

As one of the commenters who was upset and tried to counter PBs Holocaust denial (and other comments he has made), and is generally annoyed by him, I still don't see more moderation or getting rid of anonymity as a solution to any perceived lack of quality commentary here. Unfortunately that's what open conversations are-open. This isn't my kitchen or my study group or my safe space. So I assume that the admins are culling the most extreme cases of anti-anarchist and disruptive commentary. That's all I expect.

for moderating anti-anarchism we would have to determine what anti-anarchism is, and that would bring us to the issues of anarchist purity, sectarianism, etc. Tendencies within anarchism are extremely varied. Some consider this to be a positive aspect which makes anarchism dynamic, as opposed to a static doctrine.

"now that the caliphate of worker has be deposed, let us destroy all gods!" - some troll said that

been around since before infoshop sucked and will attest to how awesome this site has been. content has always been top notch, or meaningful and curious for anarchists. worker and the other uploaders, always seemed to be open to publishing the things that other sites would shy away from, for the sake of the best, even if it was terrible. being open and non-sectarian has certainly garnered Anarchist News critics and a lot of displeasure, especially from the comments. they are a bit struggle more often than not, and perhaps even more recently. as someone who has read a lot of comments (not every single comment as purported by worker) i usually just skip the stupid shit and get right to the goodness. it's not usually hard to weed out.

some recommendations perchance...?
- implement, as before some drupal mods. like community comment aggregation (if a comment sucks make it invisible,but still reachable with a click).
- actual ability to follow comments and replies. someone needs to cast a drupal wizard for a lot of this stuff.
- anarchist news earned my respect back in the day because they had an IRC chat. not saying to do this, but things like this that have made the site different from other sites.
- it would suck to have to constantly delete shit that ppl post, i know. create anarchist revolution so ppl stop posting like dumbasses on anarchist news.

subcommander macaroni

...yet again

"implement, as before some drupal mods. like community comment aggregation (if a comment sucks make it invisible,but still reachable with a click)."

So the baying hordes of punk assholes can remove visibility of well-thought comments even more than they can now?

Currently, if there are any well-thought out comments, they are hidden amongst a sea of misspelling, profanity, and general 12-year old boy behaviour.

This would be worse if people could down vote posts.

All other forums have usernames, and one can begin to associate a given username with a 'person', even without having met them. Whether you like us or not, you can do that with myself, emile, SirEinzige, PostBiceps and the handful of other users of this site who use the same username consistently.

There is even a link that says 'Create new account' that doesn't even change the way the commenting system works, and I'm still having to type in fucking CAPTCHAs.

There most definitely are some technical solutions to how crap the commenting is on this site, and could make it much, much better, given that it already has a large user base.

Sadly, the vibe around here is that consistent name equals troll, with repeated calls for Palmer raids to eliminate the named...

I think that part of that problem is some of those with names have clearly gotten their accounts jacked at various points (even over the last year).

Now posting as The Unterrified. I apologise for suggesting that the Create New Account function did not work. The resulting email had gone to my Spam folder. Sadly, I still have to enter CAPTCHAs.

There are internet bots, of political parties, of secret service, etc, so, not all comments are really comments, some of them are just trolling, or as they do at glen greenwald site, the intercept, they make 1000 comments, so, all valuable comments are not read because nobody will really read your comment among 1000 comments. in that way, they prevent that somebody reads valuable comments that are against present order/system.

chuck from infoshop cried long time ago: when anarchists will stop to use facebook? but as we see, anarchists still use facebook.

people are under influence of trends, they will use what they want, screen instead of f2f, in any case, not all people are equally social, so, I don't see any reason to "force" people to socialize and be f2f. there were many people before 200 years who didn't have screen and they didn't spend time with other people so much. maybe some of us are tired from fetish anarchists and their cliche stories, so, we stay beside screen, if we want to do something, we will do alone and not together with other people. I am not interested to make philosophy with western soft spoiled rich beer drinking cannabis smoking blabla anarchists, if they didn't do anything against the Gov without me, surely I will not come to them to tell them to attack government (they would say even that I am agent provocateur, to protect their spoiled activism). and what to say about germany, they are even paranoid about every newcomer, you must have recommendations, in other case, they will be suspicious about you. the same case in Sweden, they are full of fear from everybody. if you ask for sleeping in squats in berlin, you don't have any chance, you will stay on the street, but if you have recommendations, you can get a place, the same as that you came to george bush, without recommendations, you can't come near to him. and what to see in squats? middle and upper class anarchists and punx drinking and sleeping on the floor drunk, too drunk too fuck (dead kennedys), etc etc.
all in all, bullshit.
anarchists from south europe will work and live together much better with latin americans than with west/north europeans who are still products of capitalism with leftist rhetoric. without to go in details how much danish anarchists are under control of secret service, I don't have any wish to socialize with them, they betray each others and minimum 30% of them are secret service spies. in other case, there would be attacks on the gov in denmark, but there is no such thing, even without me and my "shitty" opinion about them.
when there are no attacks, society is under control, in this case, anarchist groups are under control, and again: 3 anarchists got arrested before they succeeded to burn police academy, so, without me and my shitty opinion, there are facts that secret service is very successful in Denmark, against anarchists. therefore, I don't care to socialize with them. the same is with paranoid germans, swedes.
the most open anarchist groups are in switzerland, they accept every new person and they are far away from paranoia. but I don't plan to go now there, I would always recommend to the anarchists to visit swiss rather than denmark, they will socialize much better ... they will not need a screen :)
although swiss are typical swiss, full with rules, what other do, you must do, little bureaucratic people. they don't have individuality, but they are better for socializing than danes. you can make blabla how much you want, drink beer, visit concert in a squat, etc. after that you can sleep better, while immigrants and other people are in the same shit in this system as before you socialized (drank beer) with other people. socialize or not, it is fetish anarchism, blabla drink drink, sex sex, blabla, sleep... "we are better than other people because we fight (in our mind) for a better world". I think people in religious sects think also they are better than other people and they sleep well because of that.
shortly, many anarchists are not anything better than government, most immigrants are NOT accepted by anarchists in the west, you must be the same as they are, or you are not welcomed. the same as angela merkel with turkish, anarchists have the same behavior, "you came to germany, you must be like germans, if you don't like it, go back to your country". really, anarchists are far away from anarchism. behavior is important, not only rhetoric.

Heh, it's funny how this whole thread is about how to do stuff to the website.

Sites like this become more useful the more exciting stuff is happening in the lives of the people who use it. No tech fix can change that. When we participate in social struggles as anarchists (even if we participate in anti-social ways) we create the kinds of situations that are actually worth talking about. Momentum is slowly increasing throughout North America, so hopefully as the anarchist space gets more exciting , so will the anarchist online space.

That said, I like the idea of explicit norms for posts and comments, even though that already exist to a degree. The more the posts stay close to action and analysis of action (and away from theory-for-its-own-sake and navel-gazing) the better the discussions seem to be.

I dont need anyone to filter content for me, thank you.
I can decide for myself if something is worth considering or not.
The only thing that sets this site apart and the reason many come here, from what I gather, is the easy anon comments.
Why would anarchists want to control what others can say or read?
What are you trying to get out of conversations? Back patting? Because it seems anyone here that brings an point of view that isnt part of the mainstream conversations within North American/European anarchism gets called a troll by someone.
This topic and many of its commenters sounds like anarchists who are concerning themselves with how they can ethically and successfully purge the "milieu".
The mods of @news already refuse to publish some content which is meant to stimulate discussions on certain topics who can be very pertinent to SOME anarchists, like eco-extremism in Mexico, but they choose to keep people silent and/or in ignorance for whatever reason, and now, according to some, the comments should also be under stricter control.

See how technology sets issues on its own terms?

You don't get it... it's far beyond just you and this website.

The main concern is that the newcomers to anarchy and anarchism coming here to know more about it are coming across tons of trolls and trollbots posting walls of text explaining us, accodring to Mach or Pointcarré, how we need a "relational language" within the non-dual relational sace of indigenous anarchism, or persistent posts about how hating Jews is anarchistic and bioregionalism is the way to future anarchy.

In so, the (probably paid) agents of status quo are winning on the cognitive level... simply because Thecollective are discussing yet not doing anything keeping the parasites away from this site. Proof: "emile" still has an account.

State despots understand the importance of information warfare as part of a counterinsurgency strategy. You don't.

emile is a threat to our great anarchist insurgency!! how will the oppressed people ever arise to smash all the atm machines and organize their workplace in time if they are too busy reading his essays?

Clearly you're too dumb to have read or given any thought to the comment you're replying to.

But really oh really, who're you standing for here? Pomo text generators?


standing up for humane conversation -mutual-aid-, non-linear, undefined, autonomous, dynamic process .

emile's nihilist deconstructionism appears to be an experimental attempt at absolute antiauthoritarian philosophy.
if emile's thought excersises suggest a third-positionist stance, perhaps there's an honest existential challenge in the form of absolutism -absolute anarchism being an inherent oxymoron- . calling emile names and dismissing their premise for conversation as irrelevant to your defined version is not only authoritarian but it incidentally demonstrates your lazy, closemindedness and bullying.

the newcomers are able to read our responses to emile's absurdist tirades -it's a participatory thing- like, DIY. the more overlording the more subjugation of personal integrity.

Fuckin' eh.

This is a news site, not simply some reddit board. It's often the only place on the English internet that various articles and communiques are posted (though that's now changing, largely because of this shit), as well as an important entry-point for the anarcho-curious. The comment section has been, in the past, a place where a truly impressive number of anarchists from across North America came to discuss shit, and where people like Boots Riley would actually show up and argue points with critics. Nobody would admit it IRL, but everyone was always up on the last week's @news gossip. And yes, it got nasty, but it was Primmies vs ancoms, nihilists vs. platformists, etc, and a lot of good discussion happened in between the calls to "go fucking kill yourself". Nowadays, the comment section is just fucking embarrassing, to the point where I hesitate to share links for fear that people will assume that this shit represents "anrachists".

I know I won't be popular for saying this, but taking a non-sectarian approach to anarchy doesn't mean avoiding the question of definitions altogether. At some point you're still going to have to make that "I'm sorry, but that's not anarchist" call, not because something doesn't fit into your specific brand of anarchism's definition, but because it doesn't fit any of them. AnCaps are *not* anarchists, nor are NatAns, nor are the few self-obsessed crypto-fascists who keep flooding these comments with crap. I don't care if it takes usernames, a ratings system, or the end of comments altogether, but turning this site into an entry-point for alt-right weirdness is a fate worse than death for the project.

'being embarrassed' about the site suggests a sense of ownership, clubism and purificationism. that's the ubiquitous fare that's been setting us all to puking and bringing us here. we need it like a hole in the head, ..

i don't underestimate the richness of the potential that lies in reserve below what happens to be bubbling up on this @news site in any given time period. keeping the door open has value in itself, like the 'hole in the wall' 'outlaw' refuge.

emile's writing touches on the nasty 's' word which is taboo in the Western Euro-American secular culture. that's why russell means said that Europe had to die for the world to live; the whole fucking cultural mindset has been 'mechanized' by the newtonian brain-draw or in other words 'de-spiritualized'.

as soon as one gets into the relational view, one has to deal with the 'non-local, non-visible, non-material aka 'the relational' aka the 'spiritual', and for the macho mechanics of Western reason-first anarchism, there is a fear that if one even mentions 'spirituality' aka 'relationality' aka 'relativity', one's balls will shrivel up and drop off. that's probably why aragorn hasn't found any non-indigenous types amongst indigenous anarchists, and why people use a euphemistic objection to post-modernism, though its S P I R I T U A L I T Y that brings on the scrotum-shrinking panic attacks.

anyhow, its valuable to have a forum that is open to accommodating all such discussions, if/when/as the need reawakens.

But Emile's not anarchist. So it's not about "purging the milieu", but just getting rid of obnoxious, useless distractors that promote the status quo. And instances of this in his post are all over the place. You're a comptlete tool of you even pretend not having seen the loads of evidence making Emile an authoritarian, not just in his shallow arguments, but also in his repeated invasive attempts at enforcing his POMO GENERATED TEXTS and manually-written reactionary condescendence upon others here.

Defending "human conversation"... *sighs* Now AIs are considered human? Nice trololol keep it up!

The indigenous aboriginal languages use verbs where European languages use nouns. Nouns impute the existence of ‘independent being’ and this is the basis of ‘categories’. the House Unamerican Activities Committee, in their quest to eliminate socialist sympathies in the U.S., used the category labelled ‘communist’ to alienate those who were exploring or practicing thoughts and activities that were listed as common properties of a ‘communist’. Using the binary logic of ‘independent being’ [‘is’ or ‘is not’] instead of coming to an understanding of an individual on the basis of his cosmic fetalization [his overall relations with the world], the idea was to discover the meaning of 'who a person was' on the basis of whether his attributes and behaviours fit one or the other of mutually exclusive categories of beings; i.e. ‘red-blooded american’ or ‘communist monster’.

There was a corresponding set of social practices [embrace, alienation] that went together with the categorizations. In this way, one could ‘short-circuit’ the development of meaning for a person or thing, without having to go the long route that explored cosmic fetalization.

That is, 'categories' are part of system of constructing reality called ‘semantic reality’ which serves as an ‘operative reality’. If a unique, individual human [understood by their cosmic fetalization; i.e. their engaging within a uniquely unfolding situation in the transforming relational continuum] could be shown to belong to this or that ‘category’, then there would be no need, in understanding 'who he was', to review his whole life story [his cosmic fetalization], but one could use the generalization constituted by the common attributes and practices associated with the pre-fabricated category. [btw. Nietzsche refers to the subject-and-attribute conceptualizing as ‘a great stupidity’].

However stupid it is, it saves a lot of time because we are all busy people and we don’t have time to discover who a person is by reviewing their whole life story and that of their parents and grandparents and siblings and circle of friends and all of the relational and social situational circumstances that have shaped their development, so why not prepare some ‘categories’ that apply generally, and then, by figuring out which category to bin them in, we can learn all about them from our pre-prepared categorical common-property lists.

Of course, this is easier to do in the case of niggers, muslims and chugs because of their appearance; i.e. their binning comes much quicker and more easily than say, ‘anarchist’ or ‘capitalist’ or ‘authoritarian’, ... but for those of us in a hurry and with the fleetness of tongue to leap to the answers, without have to struggle through heavy undergrowth of the life experience of others, a quick binning awaits our leap-frogging arrival, which can be used to sweep the forum floor clear and open up space for those who ‘really deserve it’ like Uno Hoo.

As Howard Zinn pointed out in ‘A People’s History of the United States’, one can bin the same people as the authors of “the construction of a wonderful new world in the Americas”, or as the authors of, “the destruction of a wonderful established world on turtle island”. it is all a matter of perspective aka self-serving 'subjectivity'.

If we search through the authors posting on @news, we can pull the “instances of this” [good, bad, indifferent] that are “in his post all over the place” that we can use as expedients to our goal of giving him membership in the “obnoxious, useless distractor” category.

History is a weapon that one can use to support opposite contentions.

That’s where ‘relationality’ [spirituality] comes in which says that, at the bottom of it all, ‘relations are all there is’ [mitakuye oyasin], so that ‘categories’ are just idealized constructs that live in ‘semantic reality’ and do not exist in the physical reality of our natural experience.

of course, a hardline 'categorizer' can find in this post, the necessary attributes to categorize and summarily dismiss the entire language-based understanding-sharing attempt, as PO MO jargon.

am i, myself, categorizing Uno Hoo? if you think about it, you may acknowledge that i am speaking about 'process' as in 'verbs' rather than 'nouns', ... 'relational dynamics' rather than 'independent beings'.

the Quechua call it Ayni.

it is evidently a layover of 'relationality', 'spirituality' and 'coincidence of opposites'; i.e. the notion of circular process as in Mach's principle:

"our individual dynamics are conditioning the dynamics of the relational collective we are included in at the same time as the dynamics of the relational collective are conditioning our individual dynamics" -- Mach's principle

it is the ethic of indigenous anarchism.

seems worth an elaborating;

Ayni (Noun)
In communities like the Q'ero, five principles define the Andean way of life: munay (to love), yachay (to learn, know, and remember), llan'kay (to work), kawsay (life), and ayni (reciprocity).[3] Among them, ayni is regarded as the most important principle, as it provides the backbone of life. This is because ayni is not limited to being compensated for earlier help; a more broad definition of ayni would be the exchange of energy between humans, nature, and the universe.[4]
An example of this would be ayni between a human and a tree: A tree is watered by a human, and the tree uses this water to convert carbon dioxide into oxygen and glucose. The oxygen is used by humans to perform respiration and survive, and some glucose may eventually find its way into products that humans use such as fruits. In return, humans convert oxygen back to carbon dioxide for use by the tree, as well as plant seeds the tree produced to create more trees. The simple of act of watering a tree can also reap in rewards including by not limited to: creating shade, wind barriers, soil anchors, and more. The relationships that can be defined as ayni thus extend to everything beneficial involving two parties.
Ayni (Verb)
In practice, Quechua and Aymara communities apply ayni through human to human interaction. This is thought to have originated from the harsh climate of the Andean mountain region and the mutualism thus demanded for the survival of the people living there.[5]
Members of a community help other members for private purposes when support is needed for activities such as construction and planting. Participants are supplied with food and drink by the hosting party. The party that was helped returns the favor by assisting those who helped them or others in need of aid, completing the reciprocity.
This is not to be confused with Mink'a, also native to the Andean region, in which participants are typically paid for services such as harvesting crop.[6] -- wikipedia

this stands in contrast to Western mechanical thinking [de-spiritualized 'semantic reality'] which imputes all actions and results to 'independent beings' with 'free will' who are 'masters over their acts'; i.e. humans seeing themselves being fully and solely responsible for their own actions and results, ... a worldview that is blind to the circularity in natural phenomena,... a blindness born of binary thinking [all-hitting, no-fielding, all-genesis, no-epigenesis] that leads to win/lose competition [free-market capitalism] with it's purported 'trickle-down' benefits to the 'less competent' [read 'oppressed', 'enslaved', 'hobbled' 'suffocated', 'genocidees', 'colonizeds']

Just jumping in to say I like emile's posts and don't understand all the hate.

(not a real reply, sorry emile)

spend more time here,then the rambling-old-man archetype who says the same 10 things over and over will become painfully obvious.

do verbs have any meaning without nouns? can a "relation" exist without something(s) being part of that relation?

is spirituality actually synonymous with relationality? is there only one kind of "spirituality"?

are indigenous anarchists in fact the only "real" anarchists? what does indigenous really mean? is a white woman born on land that previously was only populated by indians an oppressive colonizer?

is it binary, anti-relationalism to create a dichotomy between the rational and the non-rational?

is emile a woo-woo cultural appropriator? a philosophical genius? ward churchill's bastard child? the first true AI created?

but a few of many questions raised by emile's walls of text.

Nothing alone has meaning, everything is subject

ohhh, I see, so I get what you're saying... we would purge the milieu of those who aren't "really" anarchists... thanks, I hadn't understood that the first time, but now that you explain it, it all makes sense.
On with the purge of reactionary pomo-generated condescending authoritarianism, you tools!

"*sighs* Now AIs are considered human?" . I'd bet my scrotum sack/labia that your this Dr Twinkles, Dave Bowman troll, full of malicious authoritarian arrogance, who spends all its time haranguing others, mostly emile? You could even be Troll Commander! So you've decided to spend hours every day on a mission to destroy and deny the pantheistic ideas of another poster. That is a deep seated Christian guilt complex you got there, it explains your entrenched Western materialistic set of values, very narrow and boring. My sacks still here :)

This isn't the old thought experiment about yelling fire in a theatre, this is more like when 1 or 2 people who don't even have the capacity for an adult conversation keep loud-talking overtop of everyone else. This is like walking down the street and some evangelizing bible-thumper follows you for 5 blocks, ranting about how JESUS IS AN ANARCH. Being able to down-vote comments would obviously be abused but it might give these delusional windbags some sense of how everyone hates them. Ziggy and Biceps seem to honestly think they're arguing with the same handful of critics instead of almost every other person here.

What if somebody just really needs to shut the fuck up once and awhile? Not even cause I disagree with them but just for the sake of variety. How much time should anybody be spending here? Have you broken 100 comments in a week? Then you're taking up a lot of space "anarch", get another fucking hobby.

How does someone "loud talk overtop of everyone else" on an online forum? Text is pixels on a screen, nothing more. Why do you give text some sort of extraordinary power that it doesn't have? Pixels on a screen are actually NOTHING like being accosted by Jesus freaks while walking down the street. You seem to be equating virtual reality with personal flesh and blood reality, if not actually outright identifying with it. Strange.

New poster here. You're splitting hairs. In a forum like this, there is a huge difference between scrolling through a million comments, trying to guess which ones are worth reading, and being able to read an intelligent discussion about people who are participating in good faith. Just about no serious site on the internet adheres to the insane, absurd "openness" you seem to be recommending.

Also, why are you so emotional about this? The exclusion of a racist, sexist Holocaust denier or two can hardly hurt this site, unless you're not an anarchist at all.

What exactly is a 'serious site'?

Like, any fucking website not run by an adolescent boy, basically.

Well that's substantive.

How do you talk over everyone else with text? The volume of your posts. If you have no friends and feel the need to post every little half-baked idea that passes through your brain on this forum because you're achingly lonely, I'll give you my pity while still pointing out that you're taking up a lot of space. Nobody needs to be posting dozens and dozens of comments in a day. How interesting could you possibly be to other people? It's explained pretty concisely in my original post actually. Do you post more than 100 comments in a week? Then have a moment of clarity about yourself and put down the keyboard. If you were that interesting, we'd be telling you that instead of begging you to shut up.

i'm really disgusted by so many anarchists here begging to have someone or something decide what is a valuable contribution or not. Yay for close minded sterilized anarchism.

So go back to Fedbook, anti-anarchist troll.

Who are you talking to?


Who, me?!

No me.

Oh, and what happened to Emile? Every time he posts something someone calls him a troll just because many people don't understand him. I've been coming here for many years and often, not always, I find his interventions quite pertinent.

Oooh... those totalitarianarchists of Thecollective. Those despots.... removing our misunderstood genius Emile and his po-mo generated texts, further eroding liberal free-speech. How dare?

And his texts simply require an attention span beyond a simple mind like yours.

Emile questions the roots of original consciousness, which is beyond the grasp of ideological marichonettes, and so they troll and insult him. And there be many psuedo-anarchist fools riding on the beast of slander and ridicule who cannot distinguish gold from clay.

one woman's gold is another's clay.

questioning the original roots of consciousness may be an interesting discussion. but it does not appear to be a discussion that has much interest here, for anyone other than emile. maybe that discussion should be had in a forum for philosophical exploration, rather than an anarchist "news" site. just perhaps?

interesting semantics:anarchist news as philosophical exploration..
what's more philosophical than anarchism? and isn't the news all about exploration?

I'm glad someone is standing up for me against emile. I was starting to feel bad about my scientifically managed industrial job in a bland building.

They're deleting emile's posts! Part of the new correctivist neo-liberal purge going on globally.

Where will the rev go without Mach and relation languages!? Thecollective... u anarchist anti-intellectual inquisitors! Nooone of you could match the intellectual superiority of Emile by going through his walls of text and ascerting their inner hermeutical intricacies.

Remember THAT when all the proles are in prison five years from now! What a chance at strategic evolution you've all missed, LOWLIIIIIVES!

(running back to his university's library, crying like a baby)

"ascerting their inner hermeutical intricacies" is a self-educational process concerned with distributing knowledge to those unaware of certain abstract concepts, tactics if you like, to make existence a little bit more bearable whilst contemplating the Now/Other complex. His concern is with the 'inner revolution', proles in prison is Now. How to free them?

And be done with it. Unfiltrated freeforall posts(save for kiddy porn and doxing)

Or go back to 4chan and stay there forevoer, with your Third Positionnist friends who think Hitler was a great anarchist.

There is no post left/anarch 4chan forum that I know of(probably not interested in leftypol). I don't really hang out there much anyway.

TIL: if you're non-dual and don't believe in binaries, nihilist to christian morality, don't believe in abstract concepts before your directly experiencing the world it means you're a third positionist. somehow.

You can call names, and I still won't believe in nations, borders, or hitler.

Try harder! Straw Men are old and moldy.

It seems also that artistes are the bane of close-minded anarchists.

In the relational dynamics of society, we are prisoners of a MOVEMENT that arguably started 2500 years ago [Plato and Socrates putting reason and morality into an unnatural precedence over intuition and balancing/harmonizing, thus inverting the ethic of Heraclitus] which has been reinforced by Western monotheism [Judaism, Christianity, Islam] and then again by the secularized version of monotheism, ‘science’, ... this movement entrenching itself around the globe by the secularized theological device of ‘sovereigntism’, the essential tool of colonization of people.

Some of us would like to see this change. For example, indigenous anarchists would like to see this change. By now, our extended circle of friends and families is in diaspora within the predominating grid of the MOVEMENT, and we do not know, how many others there are nor who they might be, who are either looking for the same sort of societal transformation as we are. If we were more concentrated in one region, as with the Zapatistas, there could be a chance of circling the wagons and fending off the MOVEMENT, but the general problem is that there are millions of quote-unquote ‘anarchists’ dispersed amongst billions of people. This doesn’t mean that billions aren’t ready for fundamental societal transformation, but in such shifts, there needs to be some sort of catalysis. If people in this diaspora within the acidic red of the MOVEMENT can connect and absorb some alkali under the cover of the red, at some point, a tipping point will arrive and what was acidic-red will become alkaline-blue.

If these connections can connect as in a rhizome structure, this catalysis can be rapid and global. But what flows through these connections will not be doctrine and moral judgement as with the MOVEMENT, but an ethos that puts ‘personal experience’ in precedence over theory, and that requires input forums that capture the heart-voice of people and puts in precedence over their head-voice. Ideally, people can come together in a learning-circle where each person gets the chance to speak from their heart as the talking stick is passed to them. The others listen respectfully, though there is no requirement to agree with what is being said [personal experiencing is unique]. What comes from this, from bringing into connective confluence the diverse multitude of personal experiences that are shared in the circle, is an understanding of community that has not been manipulated by political manipulators and the media (or do i repeat myself).

So, there are these two types of forums;

1. The reason and morality based approach of the MOVEMENT makes use of forums that debate and choose amongst different strategies aimed at constructing a desired result. In the limit, the forum is totally one-sided [the authoritarian doctrine, as in a Church 'forum' where content is presented without any 'comment section']. Political forums aim at refining out the diversity and achieving a common doctrine; i.e. they aspire to Churchhood.

2. The intuition and balance/harmony sustaining approach of indigenous anarchism makes use of forums that share experience that reveal relational imbalances and disharmonies that are affecting the participants. Sharing such experiences tends to inductively orchestrate and shape individual and collective behaviours , putting them in the service of restoring and sustaining balance and harmony.

In a high concentration of people with similar anarchist ethos, as in Chiapas, we can use f2f forums to get our guiding input.

In a dilute concentration of people with anarchist ethos, as is the current situation in most of the world, f2f forums are difficult and one anarchist amongst 100 MOVEMENT supporters has its drawbacks (there is typically zero take-up and discussion on non-MOVEMENT sourced topics). Likewise, there are imperfections in non f2f internet forums, but at least they are readily available and they can overcome the dilution problem (to a great extent).

So, that is one answer to your question;

“"Why do anarchists continue to rely on crass tech solutions to social problems?"

i.e. to overcome the impediment to f2f social relations that comes from spatial-relational dilution.

Internet technology allows us to partially and imperfectly overcome sub-critical -mass f2f dilution, wherein we are interspersed with lead-rod like MOVEMENT supporters.

To mix metaphors, internet forums, in facilitating non-f2f ‘meeting-of-minds’, offers potential for rhizome-like growth of the anarchist experience-tuning ethos. Such growth is at the same time converting lead-rods into radiative source-receivers, enhancing f2f relational possibilities.

As far as the imperfections in anarchistnews, one doesn't mind ‘panning for gold’ in the comments section so long as there remains flecks of gold dispersed in the tons of dirt. To me, removing the comments section is a shift in the direction of the Church where items of content are put up for silent target practice that never gets to coalesce.

In this regard, the ‘topic of the week’ is an improvement in being a solicitation of participant input rather than a direct invitation to throw darts (typically the same old entrenched opinion based darts). in order to get closer to the learning-circle, one would have to add a non-topic of the week, an empty space where anyone could give voice to what they are currently experiencing, feeling, thinking. Others posting comments could take the prior comments of others into consideration but all comments would have to come in the form of 'from the heartfelt experience' of the person commenting; i.e. it couldn't be a cheapshot put-down of someone else's comment [that would be fairly easy for a circle-keeper to moderate]. What I'm talking about is a simple addition that does not replace the comments and topics of the week as they currently exist. i.e. kind of like an open diary entry on whatever one is feeling/experiencing at the moment. It works in the f2f environment, and perhaps it could work in cyberspace.

Some of us would like to see it change indeed.

Too many mental gated communities right now.

Some variation of this topic has been talked to death for years. While I applaud the effort of the current crew to make this site's comments not as nasty as they were in previous years (and their willingness to engage w/criticism rather than just laugh it off), I think that the comments need to go.

Maybe turn them off for a few months and then bring them back, give the trolls and morons a chance to find something else to do.

This site seems considerably less vibrant than it did in the past, the content less diverse, and the comments even worse than before. I kind of feel like it's a matter of getting rid of the comments or watching this site die a slow death as it fades into irrelevancy because people just won't deal with it any more.

I go back and forth, but at many times, this site has been like an embarrassment to the meileu and it seems increasingly so these days.

f2f has become dangerous and stressful in modern urban landscapes so the majority associate with friends only. Peeps can do f2f on the internet, cams can make it as if you are sitting in the same physical space. Letting go of physical is the first step to metaphysical abstraction, It ends up bringing folk together more intimately. That is the nature of the technology and the new medium of mass interrelations. In previous centuries formal class regimentation was controlled by an authority, now the emphasis is on mutual unconditional respect, that is the common all pervading world ethos. Debate is an educating process, and if commentary follows the moderators method of numbering a comment as a response to another numbered comment, but do it accurately, and posts with swearing such as "cock, suck fuck, cunt, asshole, shit brains are automatically deleted etc, I don't see what the problem is.

sorry, le way, but if skype is what you consider face-to-face communication, no wonder this mediated world is only getting worse.

"Letting go of physical is the first step to metaphysical abstraction, It ends up bringing folk together more intimately."

wow. wow. WOW.

Maybe if thecollective spent more time finding and posting interesting content, the quality of conversation would rise with it. This site has been useless for the last month or more.

Sure, because it's not up to YOU to post good content. It's all Thecollective's responsibility. Because anarchism, you know....

Fucking tool. Go back to Libcom.

Not seeing any posts here from Biceps makes me very happy. Thank you to everyone doing the work to get rid of them.

I've tried to post as Post Biceps, but get deleted, so I suppose I can go anon, but I consider such option as dishonest and deceptive, but here goes, with this first anon post, I hope it lasts some minutes before being deleted, so people will at least know :(

we're leaving it up intentionally. other posts by this person, when we can tell, will be removed.

But leaving up people calling each other trolls and not discussing ideas even remotely? Interesting.

There's nothing interesting about this blowhard. Actually the only interesting thing is a few people's bizarre reactions to the simple idea that if a narcissistic, douche runs his mouth for long enough, he can alienate everyone else in the room and turn himself in to a target. I've been in dozens of on-topic discussions about things I actually do, things my comrades actually do, relevant to the real world and along comes PB to derail with purple prose about nothing and jerk himself off about egoism. Did you just get here or are you playing devil's advocate?

How do we know you're not the person who trolled PB continuously and alienated him, making him reactionary and frustrated, because this 'purple prose'was beyond your comprehension? You sound course, as if you would discriminate against an artistic type.

Not the commenter above, you fool, but you're taling about a troll (PB and probably Biceps Critic as well) who started his contract here by throwing the most puerile machist slur at feminists.

I however, am that person and yes, I'm terrifyingly course to the likes of you little dipshits with your self-aggrandizement that would never survive the light of day and can only exist in the sewerpipes of the net.

Wait, I thought I was the person ruthlessly trolling Biceps until he revealed his true colors. Um... were you posing as him sometimes? Is it possible that we were trolling each other, while trying to fight him? I mean, any price was worth it to get rid of that guy, but I'm curious.

wow, this place will be awesome once we've purged all the trolls and we're left with you two...
we'll have brilliant conversations about how we chased all the trolls out huh huh huh huh.

I'd actually love to have the conversation I tried to start nearly a year ago that Biceps derailed, first earning my wrath. It's about what solidarity with those targeted by Islamophobia looks like, when we don't want to affirm the hierarchical aspects of Islam nor Western ethnocentrism, nor, of course, the narratives of anti-terrorism. Feel up to it? Or are you just a critic?

Fire away muscle head,don't hold your punches, err rhetoric!

This notion that anyone who doesn't want to see the same assinine nonsense for months and years from the same handful of loudmouth little dipshits is a "muscle head" ... its kind of adorable. It outs you as someone with a chip on their shoulder from getting bullied as a child (I did too, it's ok if you want to cry a little dude. Feelings, right?)

Well, one thing is i'm not an activist.

I didn't *just* get here, but I admit I've only been visiting for a couple of weeks or so. Maybe I've not seen the PB stuff that you're referring to, but the worst that I saw - holocaust revisionism and talking about some kind of Boer enclave in Africa - was at least idea-based. My point was that even though I disagree with it, it still has some value as something to discuss, rather than the absolutely ridiculous stuff like "Fuck you you fucking primmie!", which is being left up for the most part.

The admins say they can't handle the sheer volume of stupid posts. So why don't they go with registered users only? That way at least people will have to make new email addresses if they want to keep coming back after being banned. Seems to work well on other forums that had trolls. Plus for me, the real trolls are the "Suck my cock, bitch" posters and not someone saying that maybe less people died in the concentration camps than originally claimed.

Hey, you seem sincere and I'm the guy you responded to. I've been lurking for years although the only difference between you and me is I've been watching this creeping 3rd positionist shit for awhile longer and I assure you a little random profanity isnt nearly as toxic as holocaust revisionism. I mean, dont take my word for it dude. Just do some searches like "Did the gas chambers happen" and then read up on the handful of organizations that run the websites that hit. This stuff is plain as day if you lift the rock and look. My own blood-brother got suckered by these websites.

Yep, I don't see how debating the accuracy of historical data could be misconstrued as a denial of the holocaust. And the real trolls who say "Suck my cock bitch" are exactly the same ones who probably don't comprehend satire, irony and sarcasm in some comments, and that PB possibly spiraled out of control feeding back to these trolls. That's my nuanced assessment of this mud slinging troll purge for what its worth.

Usually when all the source material comes from websites run by avowed white-supremacists, that's a hint. Also, since when are anarchists only communicating like it's a victorian-era cocktail party?

Except that there was a whole bunch of discussion of the line between "debating the accuracy of historical data" and outright denial, and a whole bunch of people who crossed that line. To give the tldr version, there is something of a "legitimate historical" argument over whether the holocaust was Hitler's plan all along or just the net result of his anti-Semetic policies, as well as some debate over the specific death toll (usually in the 5-7 million range). That there were gas chambers is not in dispute, except by deniers.

Not only did folks deny the gas chambers, but also cited a 6-hour hitler-fanboy-doc (greatest story never told) as their source. That ain't just some creeping third-positionist crypto-fascism, slightly-too-enthusiastic anti-Isreal activist nor even the over-the-top right-populism of Trump and Bundy, it's full on neo-Nazi look-at-all-the-wonderful-stuff-Hitler-did bullshit.

The fact that people are still trying to portray the situation as "an academic discussion about the Holocaust" only goes to show how little one can trust this apologist bullshit.

And it's also bad. What is the point of arguing this thing? It's like, you're not bringing anything new to the table, you're definitely upsetting people, you're feeding into the generalized conspiracy idea that the Holocaust is not real/exaggerated that has some dangerous results.

Okay I'm out of this debate. You're right, nothing new to the table and its feeding negative shit which is painful. My main argument concerned accuracy of historical data, but its a moot quantitative point, 3million or 20, and we all know the qualitative fact, that's enough.

Lol, I've been following your discourse with PB over the months, its hilarious, especially when he deadpans reply like- make it a 38 in the back of the head please while I'm eating a Mac 1/4 pounder, thanks- You 2 resemble a comedy act, like Abbott and Costello, lol.

Different person dude. You and ziggy definitely seem to struggle to understand that there's a lot of different anon posters who all find you repulsive. Not like I actually care at all mind you, I find you about as interesting as something I stepped in. Only thinking of it until I clean my boot.

see the level of discussion coming from the "purge the trolls" types?

I'm perfectly capable of discussion too, you charmer. You just have to demonstrate a willingness to engage respectfully before I will reciprocate.

"We know, we just don't care"

That so ziggy? Ive seen you assume you were arguing with 1 person instead of 3 or 4 many times. Perhaps you get distracted while jerking yourself off with your keyboard?

I wish more people were addressing the questions being asked.

For one, I didn't know people were still flocking to facebook. I thought they were going to lose about 80% of their user base over the coming decades, because younger people aren't really using it. They use twitter more. My little brother is 15 years younger than I, and at 14 he doesn't know a single peer that uses facebook. They're already onto the next cool thing, for now. I really don't know what will really keep them locked into internet communication other than live video games. Hanging out for his generation is talking to people over an Xbox headset. That's hanging out...

I thought Riseup had several million users. That seems like a substantial and useful project/service for many people around the globe.

How will society, capitalism (etc...) function as is with so many generations of shut ins, and depressive lonely folks? Who will take notice, or take care of these folks---as surely health standards will take a tumble. What shape will bodies be in, when so glued to screens searching for something right in front of them that they think is unobtainable (because there's a self-imposed screen in the way)? Nothing lasts forever. No single mode. Nothing will be able to stay constantly on with the drastic shifts in weather. There will be interruptions.

When I started dialing up, back in 1997, I had know idea as a particularly shy middle school kid that used ICQ to talk to peers (and girls) I was too scared to IRL meant someday that the internet wouldn't just be a cumbersome accessory to life, but The Only Thing that humans really do all day.

And, that it's The Only Thing really impoverished meat space. All of the shit-talking, narcissism, hate has made us more skeptical of talking directly face to face than needs to be. Most of it's silly pretense. It's much easier to do than people think. Some people just don't do it often enough to remember how easy it is. I talk to strangers all of the time. There's still a lot of warmth. I remember meat space, and how many different types of interactions I could come by. Maybe I'd grab a friend, and go to the library and read. Maybe we'd pull Jackass stunts in rich people's bushes. Maybe we'd go get a slushy and quote from our favorite films. Maybe we'd grab bikes and hit the trail on a cool fall day, and see how fast we could go. We'd build dirt jumps. Someone would invite us over to ride four-wheelers.

Now, it's hard to get people to play music with. I'm pretty much stuck being a bedroom rocker. Maybe it's because I'm going to be 30, but not everyone has kids or has 'settled down.' We've got plenty of free time. People seem reluctant to do much besides binge drink (and be in denial about it), netflix, and facebook. Meanwhile, they often wonder why people don't want to hang out or do anything...

It's also hard to continue to find humans the Center of interest. I'd rather go to the woods and listen to the Orioles than all of the human industrial white noise. We talk about ourselves a lot. In fact, I'd argue that now there's an overwhelming saturation of media, and we're just not that interesting. What are people doing in the latest TV shows? By and large dramatized versions of what we do: check our phones, watch tv, look at shit on the internet, do online shopping. There's too much to see, and not enough money or attention spans. There's no way I could ever have enough money to buy all of the music I love. There's too much out there now.

I think we're used to having content posted that's for the sake of shit-talk humor. We're used to just trashing whatever gets posted.

I don't know what to do about so-called 'eyeball hours' and attention spans in the wake of general electronic content stimulation overload (where we're all in portlandia tech-loops, and no one's allowed to be bored), but this site can continue to be a meeting point, a watering hole. We don't have to get along, like each other, or all want to laugh at the use of stale anarchist tropes. Maybe that watering hole aspect can push us to be more IRL. I think for that to happen, we need to be more sensitive, perceptive to arming ourselves to not be so affected by those that would quickly shut all conversation down, instead of asking (you) thecollective to purge and police every little thing.

it's truly been terrifying seeing how close-minded people are. and the same folks are asking for better content! why? if some nationalists, third positionists, fascists creep on here and pose as anarchists, what better way to confront those sorts of tactics than directly? how else can we understand how they work, and how they gain traction? Meanwhile, why be paranoid that every last poster is one of these? What good has that fear done, and what good will it do?

Hey, I like the first two thirds of your post and wholeheartedly agree. My own solution is a rehash of a 'tired old anarchist trope" from the 90s about how meat-space social centres are much more important than people realize. That's a huge conversation although the gist is coaxing people in to (for starters) talking to each other again but lets set that aside.

But I think you're misreading this situation here. This is the internet and you said "confront this directly" so that's what you've been seeing. It's an old debate about free speech and everyone gets to decide how long they would listen to what is essentially the same old neo-nazi bullshit with a bit of post-modernism mixed in.

I've helped run several anarchist spaces, worked as a bouncer for years and lefty-progressive types always struggle with the notion that you can't just "dialogue" with some people. Why would you want to? Ain't no paranoia here, there's 2 or 3 individuals who talk over everyone else about shit that would get them stomped in real life. How long should we tolerate it?

You think we should debate them? That's what everyone's been doing, in some cases, for years. That validates them, then they get to snarkily call you a "leftard" and dismiss you for "moralizing" because you're annoyed by little things like denying the holocaust.

Hah, typical lefty bouncer trope calling realists neo-fascist, whatever the hell demographic that term refers to. But slug away at you evictions and cussing, the tough bouncer talk has shivered my timbers.

"tough bouncer talk" ..? Thats cute. Its a simple reality. Politics to me is what happens when dialogue stops working. Working as a bouncer is 97% talking so its not even a very good example of being a badass.

you forgot something central to your bar metaphor...
its a representation of capitalist dynamics of property of space and formal authority... dont you think this is a bit of a sketchy model to base how to deal with situations? Kinda makes me feel like "stomping" you...

Well you're always welcome to try ;) But the bar isn't a metaphor for my desired dynamics. I'm forced to work cause capitalism etc. It was just an example of an environment where you will encounter conflict that can't be resolved with words. There are countless other scenarios, take your pick.

did capitalism put a gun to your head and command you to go to work?
i hope you are saving up to by some land and retire comfortably!!!
i won't ask to visit your sectarian compound

Yeah actually. I mean, it's an analogy but I've been homeless and on welfare and after a bunch of years of other forms of shitty wage labour I settled on being a hired-thug. Sure as fuck ain't buying land any time soon haha, that's a good one.

Can't be resolved with words because your vocabulary and knowledge of noun-verb sequence and grammar is still at the grunting screaming stage of developement.

That's really funny. If we just had big enough vocabularies, there'd be no more war. All violence would cease entirely.

Well you don't see professors of literature and semantics coming to blows on the campus, so its pretty likely that big vocabularies and the associated nous to use it would result in world peace, that's if everyone received an education. So you've got a chip on your shoulder, maybe the performing artists at the clubs you work at stay clear of you macho posturing and chest puffing, maybe you're just a destructive personality unable to create genteel discourse, a brute in other words. But I'm not including rhetoric as coherent discourse.

and I'm not really interested in your transparent attempts troll-face

Yeah brush it off or snap it with your ripped muscle exoskeleton.

heheh Dude, I'm not buying it. Nobody is that ridiculous. You'll have to be more subtle next time? Anyway, I shouldnt presume to tell you how to do your job but back to the drawing board, yes? "Hmmm, which troll personality would really spin this guy up?"

The use of the word "nous", that was a nice touch but I just cant believe the character. Too cartoonish.

Something more mediocre like hired thug is actually a bonafide platformist workerist type who hates on intellectuals, and dreams of the day when he can line artists up against a wall and shoot them? Huh yeah, I threw 'nous' in to confuse him, seems to have worked.

Heheh Maybe part of your problem is how busy you are identifying with/as "intellectual"? A sense of superiority certainly seems central. That's the ugly little truth at the center of a lot of trolling in my experience. I mean, I don't actually see much evidence of any intellectuals around here but I only ever enjoyed reading the ones who didn't feel the need to constantly remind everyone.

Wow, never looked at it from that angle, that possibly I'm actually a moron posing as an articulate and refined intellectual, and that these traits overflow into the essential character of trollish behavior. Hallelujah, this is an epiphany, I feel reawakened and a great burden has been lifted, now I can walk around with a moronic blissful grin on my face at the local mall and immerse myself in mindless consumeristic consumption, push weights at the gym, and vote for Trump.

You must be new around here, our longstanding resident intellectual is a charming chap called emile. If you stick around I'm certain you'll see one of his comments.

Meat space infrastructural and relationship buiding projects don't have to be a tired trope. By that comment i was alluding to the "we are winning" photographic meme from a few years ago, and really flowery and dramatic communiques about banner drops and petty symbolic vandalism. Nowhere was I against being present in meat space in all ways.

Nowhere also was i advocating for putting reason/rationalist debate before intuitive relational experience. Nowhere am I advocating morally punishing the 'bad people' with their 'bad thinking' for crossing some invisible boundary. That would be to ignore negative causality entirely.

So, as far as free speech, I don't know what you mean. Freewill is a freewill theological fiction to show all actions voluntary so guilt and punishment can be assigned.

With that comes where I think your interest lies sovereignty: there to manage people, not their situation.

And that sounds like what you're most interested in, in terms of your post. And you misread me, because I would like to see other types of conflict resolutions that DON'T replicate a mirror image of how a nazi would handle conflict: us vs them.

That managing people not their situation explains the US prison population, and the mindset of the prison industrial complex.

There's a documentary about frech antifa (ducky boys?) getting nazi's off the street some years ago. What happened is they escalated the response of the boneheads to the point that the boneheads became powerful enough that they fucked up with their extremist tactics, drawing the ire, attention, and ultimately crackdowns from the police.

If you're not going to bother with re-balancing the situational dynamics that underlie and give rise to the right wing extemism in the first place, you're not diffusing increasingly extreme and desparate responses.

Spraying all of those pesticides has made for resistant insects and plants (that get called weeds), let alone increased cancer rates...

"There's a documentary about frech antifa (ducky boys?) getting nazi's off the street some years ago. What happened is they escalated the response of the boneheads to the point that the boneheads became powerful enough that they fucked up with their extremist tactics, drawing the ire, attention, and ultimately crackdowns from the police."

Hums... you mean in Lyon? Crafty stratagem in a byzantine fashion, though not very empowering for anarchists and the rest targeted by fascists, while helping the police in somewhat restoring their public image as "guardians of the open liberal democracy for everyone". Also quite ridiculous when you think about it... letting fascists becore more dangerous, in the wait that cops will get their asses? Fo' real. Sounds more like a really cheap excuse for more apathy.

And I wouldn't recommend such tactics in places like Italy or the US where the boneheads are sleeping with the pigs and let's not forget also defended by them.

Have you actually seen the documentary bro? I'm assuming OP was talking about Chasseurs du Skins, and if so they make a big point to talk about police support for the fascists.

Not sure I've seen it, but I'll check. Thnxs

In the meantime I prefer going to hunt for women of my taste... I mean like flirting, for the love and the pleasure not violence. It's a great deal of challenges to just talk to random girls that attract you, much harder for me than beating a huge brute.

Wow ... what the fuck are you talking about? I was agreeing with the first 2/3rds of your post so all this defensive stuff you start with makes zero sense. Then you get to the issue and you seem equally lost, talking about some elaborate liberal jedi-mind fuck to sick the pigs on the nazis with a penny-down-the-wishing-well method?

You were originally talking about people's reactions to a few trolls here, remember? You honestly can't even keep track of your own point you raised in the first place?

Are you the bouncer?

If so, do you really want a respectful response after using straw men?

My initial post was responses to thecollective's questions, regarding facebook, google, riseup. I was talking about isolation, alienation, attention spans, and the impoverishment of diverse meat space relations.

The only things I addressed about dealing with trolls is get thicker skin, and pay attention when someone's trying to shut down communication (as you're doing).

I was also referencing bouncer's last point which switched back to a hardline ideological stance on free speech, and all of this tough talk about trolls (which was really meant to be toward one lone PB in particular). All i had to say is this stance mirrored authoritarian thinking, and replicating that thinking (behaviorally policing people without changing the underlying situational conditions that give rise to authoritarian behaviors) is the PROBLEM. Fucking clear now? Or am I being too defensive?

Also, if people posed as PB i don't know the real PB. That people can jack other's screen names might be the bigger problem, no? How on earth can we judge context of words written then?

Yes, I'm the same person.

I'm not that concerned with overly academic conjectural analysis like that. I've encountered this relativistic theory many times before and it's ultimately a bunch of hippy-dip pacifist nonsense. "Mirrored authoritarian thinking", what a load of horseshit. I've certainly spent enough time here to witness this person saying plenty of totally fucked-up things, including all the counter-trolling. You're the one who's parachuting in late and making huge assumptions about people's motives.

Yes, people can do and says things where I'll take issue and not just whine about it. I'm sure there's plenty of desire to be able to say absolutely any vile, racist, 3rd positionist bullshit and have there be no consequences.

For the sake of fairness, I do believe you're arguing that any desire to stifle certain behaviours is unacceptable and while I can respect that argument as cogent, I simply don't agree. I would go so far as to call it pitifully naive and if that makes me the same as a cop to you, I'll go a step further and dismiss you as a hopeless idiot. There, crystal clarity all around, yes?

let it be

what's unacceptable isn't the lack of acceptance for certain behavior but the attempt to stifle it by REACTIONARY behavior.
uncomfortable conversations are presented on all fronts, if we can't engage threats proactively we're resigned to violent isolation. the anarchist process wants a certain degree of tolerance for challenging the confusion of hierarchical conditioning.
the anonymous anarchist forum is a perfect place to exercise conversation.
so, remain ignorant or tolerate the antagonist trolls, agitating as we may be, ..

You're misusing the word reactionary. You meant "reactive". Also interesting that you have such a megalomanical view of your own activities as some kind of noble pot-stirring. Did you catch my version? Endless repetition of assinine nonsense. Pretty different huh?

pretty different from reactive, not easily conflated, except by reactionaries…

what is it you wanted to discuss, anyways?
how to deal with Islamophobia, right?
so, what do you propose?
let's see if we can muster you a response to your liking, something clever, original and sensible to appease your frustration.

Riiight ... I want a return to traditional values. If by traditional values, you mean when a couple of little shit-heads weren't trying to finish trolling this place right off a cliff just for the lulz, then I suppose you're right. But whatever, it's basically a done deal.

Maybe a question to ask then is how to use a platform like A-News in a way that is in service of building relationships in meat-space? We have a social centre in town and specific internet infrastructure for communicating with each other, so mostly we use A-news for connecting to anarchists other places and posting things we want to be anonymous.

As a point of intersection for different crews, this site is super valuable. The ability to debate each other in the comments or exchange some persepctives or make "solidarity from..." comments is also really nice. But if this is where peoples main source of anarchy is in their lives, then that's a bigger problem (those who run the site excluded). But that problem is alienation, which can probably only be fixed by more real-world struggle.

Nail on the head. The situational dynamics in the Nazi dictatorship was - Join our party or be considered an enemy of the State- , sooo, the likes of Schindler walked a tight rope, either be executed or walk the line we draw, but do whatever one can to alleviate the escalating evil. Thus, there were many Colonel Klinks and Sergeant Schulz types who just took orders from above, as exists in any hierarchical society. Should every member of the Nazi party be considered to actually have Nazi white supremacist values, No. And was not the general Western popular sentiment in the 1930s one of white supremacy? Yes. So the dichotomy is obvious within the grand post Enlightenment era, that the individual is incriminated and dis-empowered by popular democratic verdicts.

This was reply to Meat space infrastructural. Comment terracing is bad on this site.

anarchism was so romantic when i first learned about it. now i just have this image of anarchists as pieces of shit lifestylists who don't actually give a fuck about creating a better society. why am i ranting? idk i guess im mad at ppl for not being awesome.

In my opinion.

It is hard to find people who will push you to be as awesome as you can be. And you won't find those people on the internet.

only shadow and smoke, and PoMo text generators

Worker?! Is that you?

I didn't comment on this and haven't been around for a while. Because it is geared towards post-bisceps, I'll let you hang him how you like him, his suicide would've been excellent and hopefully that is still coming. You do know you are engaging in demagogic behavior tho? You presumed a problem, which sounded like you had already made a decision, but wanted to not get shit for making a hard decision...or perhaps you were hoping for something that might soften your blow? Also, not a hard decision, you already moderate arbitrarily using crap scene ethos and blame game safe space nonsense in its jargon. Bleh!

It would help if you attempted a near death experience so you could have some perspective...maybe eat a 10 strip and think about the doom of the planet in all its many real and imaginary varieties. Then think about how you will live the entire time, bored, unburdened by the changing world, because you are in the center of the Empire and we got a couple hundred years to go, at least, before any sudden shift may occur. American hegemony is far more powerful and above anything that has ever existed and it would take an alien invasion to tip its power. That alien invasion would need the power of more than 10 planets worth of all the other countries combined to attack the American Empire to even threaten it!

So anyways, another moderator geared totw, talking about how to control the people that use (and abuse) this site. I'd recommend toning down this populist approach to control. Make a decision, deal with the shit storm, but pay attention and maybe you won't get your knuckles wrapped by people more awesome than you.

"That alien invasion would need the power of more than 10 planets worth of all the other countries combined to attack the American Empire to even threaten it!"

lol no... There's evidence they already "invaded" and since they're at least as intelligent than humans if not more, they have read Sun Tsu and know how to apply it. Meaning that most probably they've taken over the establishment instead of an upfront face-off with the entire US army. Though I'm not even sure if we're talking aliens, or just advanced people who've been "around" for a very, very long time without us foolish one-dimensional thinkers knowing aboiut their discrete presence.

Look out for "Gary McKinnon"... kinda like Wikileaks gone wild!

I've noticed a certain tendency now. This tendency away from calling commenters "trolls" to justify willy-nilly comment deletions. The new thing is "toxic people". This keeps getting repeated without any criticism. A "toxic person" is the same thing as a troll, critic or other disagreeable thought, but because it is a new word, there hasn't been any resistance to it being spread around. Nothing new happened. Same types of comments, same problems, but now that moderators realize people like trolls, they needed to create an "other".

Over and over thecollective has shown that their logic is one of control, one of demagoguery, one of bludgeoning dissident expressions. Their drive to treat the users here as children and they the perpetual kindergarten teacher, thinking they know best and that we have no ground to stand on. How false this is and how obvious they are!

The comments have slumped into nonsense and not just because of biceps and his cohorts of morons and they can't be improved via comment deletions. The problem is thecollective has no real principles, actually hates the people that comment here regularly and imagines comments being more along the conventional variety. Humor, nuance, inflection, shock value, these things are lost to thecollective. They want discussion to go only in one way, their way and what is their way? It is anyway that grants them further legitimacy to act as an unquestioned authority within this site towards those that otherwise get along rather well without their interventions. The best example, Biceps critic, was getting throttled before thecollective stepped in to stop it and deletion our posts which were aiming to drive this scum off the face of the Earth. This is state like behavior, no? Only the collective has legitimacy of violence, all others are potential problems. I just don't see how thecollective can't see this. I think their bulb might of grown dim upon getting what they thought was absolute power when taking on the reigns of this site. Get over yourself.

Toxic people?! That's racist!