The idea of banning people seems to be all the rage these days now that President what's-his-name wants to ban large swaths of people from entering the U.S. Within anarchist circles, however, the idea of banning people from anarchist spaces has long been popular among certain people as well. Some people argue that banning people is perfectly fine and is in alignment with the anarchist principle of free association. Other people say that banning people is not at all okay, saying it is by it's very nature exclusionary and leads to certain people having more influence and power than others.
There are several conversations to be had while viewing J20 in the mirror. The first is to say "good job" to the people who participated in the events of the day, to check in on our prisoners, and to ask ourselves how we can keep up the momentum. The second, and the point of this TOTW, is to ask ourselves if we are satisfied with the people we associated ourselves with during J20 and generally during this moment. It's hard to call the broad left particularly healthy, should they be who we turn to? How about Unions? The organizers of the Women's march on J21?
It’s that time of the year again, when many in society are making new plans and resolutions for the coming year. While the anarchist may oft shun such silliness from society, some areas behind these ideas demand a closer examination. This TOTW is about anarchists relation to physical and mental health.
We want to bring up a delicate topic. How do we fund our projects? What is, for lack of better terms, our business model? Of course it is strange to bring this up as anti-capitalists but it is also naive to think that the way we get and use money isn't part of the "what we do," rather than what we think.
The classic anarchist tenets were mutual aid, rejection of church and state and capitalism, solidarity, voluntary association, decentralization, and autonomy. (I might be missing a couple...)
More recently, anarchists have espoused principles like transparency, consistency between means-and-ends, and a DIY ethic.
One of the characteristics of a modern (since 1937) anarchist is a concern that hierarchy is a problem that ranks alongside capitalism and the state. We've added a few more problems to the murderers row of abstractions we oppose but hierarchy does seem like the one we devote the most energy to.
To quote the AFAQ
Words dilute and brutalize; words depersonalize; words make the uncommon common. Culture is made up of languages - languages of words and numbers, of concepts and assumptions, of conventions and expectations, of problems and solutions, of answers and questions. Languages write our lives: they set the options whenever we make a choice, however free we may be in selecting. At the same time, it is our use of them that makes them what they are and reproduces them. This week we’re looking into how languages enforce their constraints upon us and ways to adjust, subvert, and remake anarchist dialogue.
Over the past few years and especially proceeding Trump's election, there has been a lot of debate about the growth of right-wing authoritarianism. One of the items on the table is the use of terminology to describe relatively new forms of ideology and practice throughout Europe and the United States. In the USA, pundits are taking positions on the label "alt-right;" whether a variety of different sorts of authoritarians ought to be recognized in their particularities, or rather exposed as (or lumped into) an undifferentiated camp that we simply call "fascists" or "white nationalists".