# A Politely Hostile Performance Review of the Anarchist "Community"



## Franny

Please don’t let this title deceive you- I seek not to speak solely to the Anarchist community but to the Anarchist in every one of us. Regardless of particular political ideologies or any other imaginable label it’s our human nature to seek parity and freedom on both a personal and social level. I do aim to be politely hostile. As I write this I care not if I offend, though I wish to be abundantly clear in my position- The individuals self-associating with the Anarchist community I have met over the years are glorious people. In their company I have experienced unprecedented joy, freedom, and potential, along with an eerie sense of stagnation and complacency. Though saying we’ve accomplished nothing is hyperbole, our actions have taken a shameful turn towards largely internal concerns and semantics. We must cease these inane discussions over hierarchy and privilege and injustice, broaden our scope, and put these ideals into action. We’ve been resting on our laurels, and there’s never been a worse time to be so complacent.


Case Study: Crimethinc Convergence 2009



For the vast majority of you that didn’t attend the 2009 Crimethinc Convergence in Pittsburgh (or haven’t even heard of it for that matter), let me enlighten you to the insignificance of such an event. The Crimethinc Convergence is a yearly gathering of autonomous minded individuals to share skills, information, and companionship. Typically drawing a couple hundred people, it is usually held in remote wooded locations. The 2009 Convergence was the first held in an urban environment, an experiment culminating in success or failure depending on whom you ask. 

The premise of holding the convergence in the city of Pittsburgh was twofold. Some believed it would be more accessible to people of color and other disenfranchised communities, and some believed that the visibility and proximity to society would be advantageous. I decline comment on this trivial matter of success, but must bring up one clear result of hosting the convergence in an urban locale- The very spirit of the convergence centered around the issue of gentrification, a racially charged issue of economics that is plaguing Pittsburgh as well as almost every other city in the United States of America, and thanks to American imperialism, the world as a whole. This incessant discussion of gentrification accomplished little. Those most engaged in analyzing our impact on the community sacrificed the time needed to interact with the residents of the neighborhood we were temporarily occupying, thus negating whatever good intentioned assumptions they made concerning our welcome or lack thereof.

What is significant about the 2009 Crimethinc Convergence is the reaction of its attendees to what a wise participant described as “a pleasant sun shower. Most of these people have never experienced even a sun shower, let alone a shit storm. It’s good they got a taste of it.” This incident, or “sun shower” occurred late one night near the end of the cabaret. A final call for performers was made just before six individuals stormed into the space known as “the ballroom”, loudly reading ancient message board rants about the abuse of white privilege and ordering all white people to vacate the space. Many thought at first this was performance art, part of the cabaret, but quickly realized it wasn’t as the individuals who came to be known as “the disrupters” began throwing people’s belongings down the stairs and out the second story windows. They became more antagonistic, ordering the people of color to stay in the convergence space and the white people to “get out of Pittsburgh and go back to Europe.”

It must be noted that these “disrupters” were not residents of Pittsburgh but of Philadelphia. They were not the landlord, not law enforcement, and they had no right to sour an otherwise cheerful night with what added up to a truckload of racist bullshit. They were also mostly harmless, but managed to scare the two hundred or so convergence attendees to such a degree that they literally ran in submission.

There are as many opinions on this incident as there are witnesses, so I now pursue a simple accumulation of facts in this account. Fact: The disrupters did successfully utilize direct action. They sought to disband the Crimethinc Convergence and for the most part triumphed. Only about twenty individuals remained in the convergence space following the disruption. One must ask, apparent triumph or not, was this action ethical? Though many disagree- Fact: No. Racism doesn’t do an ethical handstand when people of color utilize it against those with less pigmentation in their skin. This action was unnecessary, and even served to further disenfranchise those persons of color it claimed to defend.

During and after the disruption people of color were asked to choose sides at an instant’s notice. The words and actions of the disrupters pigeonholed people of color as supporters of the event even though many of them were strongly in opposition. It reflected badly on the organization APOC (Anarchist/Autonomous/Anti-Authoritarian People of Color) as the disrupters claimed support from the organization without consent. Their choice to target the Crimethinc Convergence was a misguided one. Though they claimed the convergence was exacerbating gentrification in Pittsburgh because many of the attendees “had white faces oozing colonialism”, a glorified Anarchist squat, temporary at that, did little to increase the area’s commercial value. If anything, it lowered it. Yes, they succeeded in forcing the “privileged whites” (many of whom fell into highly exploited and disenfranchised groups themselves) out onto the street in the middle of the night, and didn’t seem to give a second thought to what was obviously faulty logic.

For those not properly acquainted, gentrification boils down to the interests of the few taking precedence over the interests of the many, usually as an influx of affluence into the uglier parts of town, displacing impoverished residents. Gentrification on a considerable scale is a devastating occurrence, and there’s little difference between the actions of the disrupters and the alleged actions they were fighting against. This glaring hypocrisy was somehow overlooked in the aftermath as hours were spent “processing” the incident as a group. The discussion focused on the convergence attendees’ perceived wrongdoings, disintegrating quickly into a two-day display of white guilt and revisionist history that never left the four walls of the ballroom.


Case in Point



Though the events at the 2009 Crimethinc Convergence served to rattle a couple hundred young activists, it was in the big scheme of things “a pleasant sun shower”. It was nothing compared to a national protest, a riot, or the class war that will eventually ensue if we continue stratifying our society to its limit. With the way this particular fragment of the Anarchist community handled a minor altercation in mind, I worry about what will happen if we do encounter a “shit storm” in the future. What was the perfect opportunity to stand up for our right to peacefully inhabit the city of Pittsburgh for the duration of the convergence disintegrated into an embarrassing display of guilt and apathy. Only six people displaced almost two hundred others. It was not only our right but our duty to defend ourselves by non-violently removing these disrupters, and as a community we failed miserably. This is a wake up call. It is nobody’s place to cower in the face of hostility and discrimination. We sacrificed our most basic ideals in favor of warring amongst ourselves.

Our disdain for and fascination with the Capitalist system that restrains us has brainwashed us and begun to bind us even tighter. It has reduced what should be an active and energetic movement into a dropout culture ruled by labels, -isms, guilt, and misleading propaganda. How ironic that the Anarchist community has fallen into such a trap! Our catchy jargon, “radically correct” language if you will, has become our own special brand of marketing, appealing to a target audience of malleable insecure youth. Our never ending and ever changing catalog of identities and ideologies has begun to mirror the models of want creation that so successfully supported Capitalism’s twisted creed in its infancy. We’ve begun to market a subculture through slang, propaganda, and the weight of our tarnished pasts; for this we should be ashamed.

In our quest to stifle hierarchy, make obsolete the atrocities of racism, sexism, ageism, and other systems of inequality, we’ve only succeeded in widening the divide. We must stop squabbling amongst ourselves over labels and perceived ignorance. Such discourse only serves to create hierarchical relationships within the microcosm of our communities. We must look beyond the security blanket of fellow activists and embrace ALL peoples if we wish to live free from hierarchy. If we in fact wish for all members of humanity and all Earth’s species to live equally we must start acting like it! If we can’t even achieve such balance within the Anarchist community, how can we begin to right society as a whole? Reorganizing our own stratified community is a logical baby-step in the right direction.

Let’s abandon our “Anarcho-Dash” surnames and rejoin the human race. Let’s regain our autonomous nature, purge our attachment to the individualist Anarchist prototype and begin thinking on a global level. Let us respect each other. Let us approach things positively. Let us stop being negative. We need not be anti-oppression, but pro-liberation. We need to reverse our ineffective opposition to that which threatens us and strive to be unified, free, accepting and confident. We need to free ourselves from guilt, sociologically imposed divisions of color, creed, and class, and the burden of history. History can’t repeat itself if we consciously strive to rewrite it to a new social standard of peace and equality.

Breaking out of the comfortable direct-action mold we’ve forged for ourselves will be empowering. It’s past time to look beyond dumpster diving, meetings that amount to Anarchist summer camps, the glorification of punk rock, fashion, and our glamorized drop-out traveling culture. We must abandon our exclusive attitudes, distancing labels and self-serving propaganda. By no means am I suggesting anyone stop printing their ‘zine, making music, wandering aimlessly or whatever else brings about happiness. I’m insisting that we be realistic. Our actions are not “radical” or “revolutionary” but ineffective, stale, and outright juvenile. Taking action can and should be pleasurable, but we need to understand the line between recreation and revolution.

Perhaps the most important and difficult trial we face is coming to terms with the challenge of our own human nature. There is no Utopia. We will always possess an innate desire to dominate and/or submit. We will always experience periods of greed, guilt, doubt, dishonesty, and failure. A successful social structure is not unlike a body trying to maintain homeostasis. The condition is constantly under and over shooting the ideal, but coming close enough to maintain balance. As the body recognizes its physiological fluctuations we must recognize our mental and emotional ones and balance them accordingly. We cannot be afraid of the parts of our nature we find distasteful any more than we can deify ourselves for the facets of our nature that are admirable. 

It’s time for all of us, myself included, to get off our asses and live what we believe in. Share the beauty of your beliefs with people you never thought you could or would or should. Get out there and teach by example. Strengthen our communities with acceptance, knowledge, compassion, and good old-fashioned positive direct action. If the world is going to change, it won’t be for of a room full of Anarchists arguing about racial privilege or gender identification. It will be for people of all kinds coming together for a common goal- Freedom.


----------



## dirty_rotten_squatter

or just avoid crimethinc period...good point though wider


----------



## Franny

Although this essay uses the Crimethinc convergence as a case study, it's not ABOUT the crimethinc convergence. It's about the Anarchist Community in general. If you had read it (which I'm sure you didn't, seeing as you put it in the wastebin) you would see that. Really, I feel like you just kicked me in the nuts, and I don't even have any nuts.


----------



## Franny

Thank you. 

Yeah, I think after that I'm all burned out on even thinking about crimethinc anyway.


----------



## yarn and glue

Fair but moot points, in my opinion; I don't consider Crimethinc representative of elegant anarchist philosophy any more than I consider the U.S.S.R. to have been truly communist. It's a mere re-branding of classism & privilege by kids who have read snappy Crimethinc slogans but not "The Conquest of Bread."


----------



## Gypsybones

in my opinion I say well said.

I'm with you on the fact that most of the so called "anarchist" are really just there because of the life style. they wear it like a patch and say "look at me I'm an anarchist" and wish to be a part of a group, rather than truly believing in the ideology's they so love to bark about from the safety of forum floors. 

the fact that this even happened says that the majority of the folks involved are not in anyway ready for a direct action of any kind. 
there was no one to lead them and because of yelling "no managers, no gods" so often no one was head strong enough to stand of and say fuck off we're not leaving. instead like little sheep they moved with the herd as directed by someone that spoke with authority.



> Share the beauty of your beliefs with people you never thought you could or would or should. Get out there and teach by example.


exactly get out and LEAD by example! I know how much you guys hate using that word but thats the way it is, if you build it they will come, if you lead they will follow.

I guess with the anarchist belief of no leaders, anyone that does show sings of it or has the inkling too are afraid of the so called Robespierre effect. 

anyway again well said


----------



## oldmanLee

Years ago,I stopped calling myself an anarchist,and you have just voiced so many of the reasons(yep,bull***t was rampant even in those ancient days!).I hope for the few that will read your "review",and come away thinking about what they can build;rather than what they can tear down.They will be the folks that actually help us a a species to have a better chance.


----------



## Franny

yarn and glue: I knew this would come up because I used crimethinc to illustrate my point. I agree that's it's an idiosyncratic group of people, but I used it because it's the most glaring example of what I believe is wrong with Anarchism as a whole. I see the same thing in my local squat, just on a much smaller scale. I do think Anarchism is starting to resemble a brand; it's not that uncommon for me to hear that someone isn't an anarchist or someone must be a rat/poser/etc. just because they don't look a certain way and spew a certain carefully worded litany of cliches.

This is eventually going to be part of a larger paper, but I wanted to get some feedback on this part. I do believe that society naturally organizes itself into a functional anarchist state, and this can been seen historically going all the way back to the days of the cavemen.

And this is certainly not without its problems. Like heavens_fall and oldmanlee said, we have preconceived and really _recently_ conceived notions about what Anarchism is or should be. I hope that part of what people can take away from what I write is that we do have some innate desire for leadership, we are all a little bit racist, and maybe that really IS okay. Our human nature and our desire for autonomy are a balancing act.


----------



## seke

if only we could find a way to bridge the gap.


----------



## yarn and glue

I agree with the substance of your points, and appreciate your saying all of this, because a critique _does_ need to be made. I would just stress that it's not Anarchism which needs a critique, but the punk embrace of Anarchism or, more accurately, Anarchy.

I'm sure you already understand this, so I'm not trying to condescend, only to make a semantic point: Anarchism is not the problem; it's been there all along as a philosophy of social reform, and it has been seized upon by many diverse groups throughout the ages -- with different fashions, customs, histories. I think in the (relatively) recent punk embrace of Anarchism, most if not all of the message has been obscured, to a point where I don't even recognize the philosophy espoused by most punks as remotely Anarchist. 

I'm always pleased to meet a few young punks who understand, and can discuss at length, the tenets of Anarchism, but I'm infinitely more pleased to meet the Anarchists who don't seem to be have any scene affiliation at all. There can be no question about with which movement their loyalty lies. People who _study_ Anarchism first don't often start dressing like punks or reading Crimethinc books -- but on the other hand, people who get into the punk scene first _very often_ move on to petit Anarchism, as a way of maturing and legitimizing their rebellion.

I guess all I'm saying is: criticize Crimethinc all you want; I just have a slight problem with dignifying the modern punk-squatter Anarchist "scene" (even outside of Crimethinc) with well-thought-out critiques, because I don't think that is where the future of Anarchism -- the Emma Goldmans of our era -- will come from. 



Franny-Chan said:


> yarn and glue: I knew this would come up because I used crimethinc to illustrate my point. I agree that's it's an idiosyncratic group of people, but I used it because it's the most glaring example of what I believe is wrong with Anarchism as a whole. I see the same thing in my local squat, just on a much smaller scale. I do think Anarchism is starting to resemble a brand; it's not that uncommon for me to hear that someone isn't an anarchist or someone must be a rat/poser/etc. just because they don't look a certain way and spew a certain carefully worded litany of cliches.


----------



## dirty_rotten_squatter

Yeah, I stopped on this subject about 10 threads ago haha, she wasnt tryin to get another crimthinc thread started, but it formed into another one. I'm pretty sure mostly everything that has been said on here has been said in the other threads as well.


----------



## Franny

With all due respect ArrowinOre, I don't see the "fuck them and they suck stuff" in what I wrote. Neither do I see anything close to what's contained in the Crimethinc literature OR the Crimethinc threads all over this forum (which I have read through completely, shocker). I have taken time TO READ THE FORUM RULES, and never expected anyone to debate Crimethinc in response to my essay.

I may be biased, but I think I made some valid points. Those are what I wanted to discuss. If you feel that reading what I wrote is redundant and a waste of your time, how is redundantly posting that you think Crimethinc sucks helping any?

By the way, you did catch me in one hell of a mood. This is in fact as nice as I can be right now.

yarn and glue: If you want to add to what I wrote, you're more than welcome to.


----------



## lobotomy3yes

You all are breath of fresh air. 

Crimethinc is cute. It's the toddler defiantly running from its mother while her hand is firmly on its head. Sweet graphics, free posters, and a couple nifty books. This post is more than that though.

Yarn hit the nail on the head talking about anarchy and anarchism. I wouldn't call it a punk problem though. The issue is post-left anarchy. The idea that the -isms of the past are suffocating us, so we should abandon them. All of the sudden the streets are filled with little ELFer primitivists and SLC PUNX warriors. Zerzan is the new Bakunin. If you are bothered by this, you shouldn't be. These people will always be there, anarchy or not. Ignore them. 

A word of advice: If a person claiming to be an anarchist doesn't mention the labour movement, they aren't an anarchist. You can weed out 99% of the chaff with this formula.


Instead of dwelling on all the negative things about these so-called "anarchists", I would like to offer some words of encouragement. Because anarchism is not dead; because anarchism never had anything to do with post-left "anarchy". I hate to break it to you, but y'all been duped. Don't worry about it though, they had me for awhile too. Plus, I have good news! The real anarchists are still out there fighting! They're just 80 years old and dying. That's why we need to know this stuff. I am sort of joking about them being old. That is only in America. 

This is where I have to correct you Fanny. I'll do it nicely though, I swear.

You say we should abandon our "anarcho-dashes", but that would be a grave mistake. They are what anarchism is all about. The post-lefties don't like this, but sometimes I get the feeling that they just don't like big words (unless the words are subversive and cool). Anarcho-syndicalism, anarcho-communism, libertarian socialism, mutual aid- these should excite you! No matter how many chanarchists come and go, these will still be there. They just don't pay much attention to our fancy buttons. You're probably skeptical by now. I mean where are these secret freedom fighters you speak of? Well, some are here but most are in other countries. Have you ever heard of anarchist labor unions? You might have, but I doubt you knew that there are actually lots of them. If this shook your boat you might as well jump out of it because I'm not done. The truth is these anarchist unionists _are BAR NONE the most successful of all the anarchists_. The idea is known as anarcho-syndicalism and it is not a recent invention. It has been around since the good ol' days in the 1800s. If you haven't read about anarchism in the 19th and early 20th centuries, I suggest that be your first step. 

The truth is that anarchism is past its peak. 50 years of preparation still resulted in failure. It didn't end there though. We just did some serious thinking afterwards. It goes to show how damn resilient this movement is. Now I know you are all getting tired of my "did you know" questions- either you already know the answers or you think I am treating you like a wee wittle cwimethinc baby, but our history just gets so fucking GOOD! So I'll indulge myself (hopefully) one last time.

Did you know that we successfully realized revolutions not once, but several times?!?! WE CAN HAZ REVOLVES! And guess what happened EVERY TIME. The people revolted, the people overthrew the government, and the people forgot all about us. This why you never knew about the anarchists in the Spanish Civil War, or that the anarchists in Russia had been instigating the overthrow of the Czars 60 years before the Bolshevik revolution. 

So why don't the post-lefty chanarchists know this stuff? The anarcho-oldguys must be too self-righteous to include them. Nope, nope, NOPE. The serious anarchists have certainly tried to enlighten us fiery youngsters, but it is comparable to pushing the Colossus of Rhodes through a potato peeler. No one wants to put up with that kind of willful ignorance. _Because the post-left anarchists are trying to reinvent the fucking wheel_.


P/L: REVOLT! ARM YOURSELVES! MOUNT YOUR SCOOTERS!

AN-SYND.: uhh guys, we tried that multiple times and well, its more complicated than...

P/L: YOUR POLITICS ARE BORING AS FUCK!

AN-SYND: ....huh?

AN-SYND: I'm just saying. A lot of people gave up their lives for the cause. In Russia, we-

P/L: *WE SUPPORT DIVERSITY OF TACTICS.*

AN-SYND: Bye.

Russia: BAKUNIN LOL

I'll address capitalism some other time. Peace lates.


----------



## Franny

lobotomy- I want to clarify something. 

I do think that the anarchist adjectives are helpful to the people that know how to use them correctly (an extension of actually knowing what they mean). I'm not suggesting that we all _personally_ forget these ideals, but I do feel that a great number of individuals are limited by them. I think it's important to see oneself as an anarchist first, and the supporter of specific anarchist factions second. And if you identify as an anarcho-syndicalist, by all means, make good of it. But don't expect that label in itself to accomplish anything.

I've met people with anarchist ideals that didn't know these ideals even carried that label. Even the label "anarchist" is confusing to most of society. It's erroneously defined as mere chaos all too often, and it's even frightening to some. It's even frightening to individuals who are unknowingly anarchists themselves. Why make it that much more confusing by putting "anarcho-DASH" in front of everything? How many people outside the anarchist microcosm even know what these terms mean? I've even considered the futility of using the term anarchist itself. We should put our intentions into words that everyone can understand and identify with. This doesn't mean we need to ignore the specific goals of anarcho-dash ideologies in our minds and practice, but that we need not make them the forefront of our actions.

In a way, incessantly referring to oneself as (I'll use this as you used it in your example, and I feel like less of an ass as I used to call myself this too) an anarcho-syndicalist is a negation of other equally important ideas. It's like being a little bit pregnant. I care a great deal about the labor movement...and the environment, and gender equality, and equal distribution of resources, and so on and so forth. Should I call myself a green-anarcho-syndicalist-feminist-socialist? So someone is an anarcho-primitivist, anarcho-feminist, anarcho-capitalist, WHATEVER. The entire premise of anarchism revolves around the idea of people being able to focus on whatever they feel deserves their attention. In an anarchist society, we would already have the freedom to live like wolves, search for gender equality, and engage in capitalist economies if we choose. While "anarcho-dashes" are useful in the present (theoretically), they won't be necessary in the long run. 

What I was getting at is that we need to stop running circles around semantics and apply whatever label we want to give ourselves to everyday life. What I've been seeing in anarchist communities for years and years is people sitting in circles discussing the merits and downfalls of adherence to particular philosophies without putting them into practice. Putting ideas into practice can prove their merit or lack thereof rather quickly. We ARE acting like we've reinvented the wheel. And we have reinvented the wheel! We've made it a fucking square. It doesn't work.

I do appreciate your attempt at kindness, but this needs some clarification too: I also think Crimethinc is cute. And I think it gets a bad reputation because of a few ignorant loudmouths that align strongly with their propaganda. Yes, I do attend crimethinc convergences. And I've read their literature and for the most part find it ridiculous. I do know a great deal of history (and if you'd like to know what I think of Bakunin specifically, I'd absolutely love to tell you). And in talking to "crimethincers" over the years, I've found that most of them really are intelligent people. It seems to be a case of the stupidest being the most vocal, really. And THAT is why I wrote this using the recent convergence as an example, because a few "chanarchists" really can lead the emotional environment to a place it shouldn't be with their ignorance and rigid stereotypes. That's what happened in Pittsburgh. And yes, the real anarchists are still out there fighting. And yes, there always will be a few people dragging the movement in the wrong direction. You can call them the post-lefters, the punk anarchists, what have you, they will be there. And everyone has to be aware of that, prevent that from standing in the way of real action, and help these people get un-stuck.

By the way, this is fucking hilarious:



lobotomy3yes said:


> P/L: REVOLT! ARM YOURSELVES! MOUNT YOUR SCOOTERS!
> 
> AN-SYND.: uhh guys, we tried that multiple times and well, its more complicated than...
> 
> P/L: YOUR POLITICS ARE BORING AS FUCK!
> 
> AN-SYND: ....huh?
> 
> AN-SYND: I'm just saying. A lot of people gave up their lives for the cause. In Russia, we-
> 
> P/L: *WE SUPPORT DIVERSITY OF TACTICS.*
> 
> AN-SYND: Bye.
> 
> Russia: BAKUNIN LOL


----------



## lobotomy3yes

Ooo I misjudged you. I agree with all that you just said. It isn't that I call myself a syndicalist, it is that I find syndicalist ideas to be very useful in certain contexts. I've been preaching to the choir this whole time .


----------



## whaleofashrimp

anarchism and anarchist are some of the sillyist load of bullshit out there
when are pc androgynous retards gonna get out of the circle jerk and realize theres gonna be no revolution
at least untill you stop this whole white guilt crap
as long as you continue with this crap your revolution will be as likely as the second comeing
i'll give it the benefit of doubt...the second comeing and the revolution are equally remote but quantum physics has taught us that everything is plausible
still i'm not gonna count on it
if theres any "revolt" on the horizon it seems more likely to come from the tea baggers

I'm dissapointed in the thread
from the headline i was expecting a headline about how delusional,hypocritical and ridiculous anarchos really are


----------



## yarn and glue

Shrimp, it sounds like you're confusing insurrectionist anarchism with anarchism as a whole. As Joe Black stated, "There is a long tradition within anarchism of constructing ideologies out of a tactic. The long and deep involvement of anarchists in insurrections has, not surprisingly, given rise to an anarchist ideology of insurrectionalism." I'm not saying that many anarchists wouldn't enjoy a good revolution, but by insinuating that a violent revolution is the main point of anarchist philosophy does it, and you, discredit.


----------



## whaleofashrimp

I try to treat people the way i want to be treated
i try to pitch in
and i try to give others warmth in this cold cold world
and stand up for my friends
that is the extent of my political ideology and as far as i'm concerned thats all i need

personaly my critique of the whole anarchist community is...a good 90% are arrogent exclusive hipster douchbags


----------



## lobotomy3yes

whaleofashrimp said:


> anarchism and anarchist are some of the sillyist load of bullshit out there
> when are pc androgynous retards gonna get out of the circle jerk and realize theres gonna be no revolution
> at least untill you stop this whole white guilt crap
> as long as you continue with this crap your revolution will be as likely as the second comeing
> i'll give it the benefit of doubt...the second comeing and the revolution are equally remote but quantum physics has taught us that everything is plausible
> still i'm not gonna count on it
> if theres any "revolt" on the horizon it seems more likely to come from the tea baggers
> 
> I'm dissapointed in the thread
> from the headline i was expecting a headline about how delusional,hypocritical and ridiculous anarchos really are


PC androgynous retards? Well you're an insensitive prick then aren't you? No one is encouraging "white guilt", but if you don't understand the concept of white privilege then I don't have much to say to you. You really think this is some sort of numbers game...As far as I'm concerned, if people aren't willing to shut up and listen, fuck em. This system is going to crash regardless, we're just trying to make it as nice as possible. Hopefully "the revolution" doesn't require planetary death and/or human extinction.


----------



## little_owl

Thank you for writing and posting that. It's such a breath of fresh air since it's difficult to find actually good critiques and ideas with what a lot of people write in anarchist communities, at least one's in the U.S. 

And I'm surprised no one called you a "liberal. Usually any criticism of cookie cutter lifestyle anarchists gets people spewing that too often.


And about Crimethinc, they are pretty much the Hot Topic of anarchism and some still think they are doing some good with bringing people into anarchism but it still just feels to me like it's just a totally vapid thing and just contributing to anarchism devolving in the U.S.


----------



## connerR

I agree with whaleofashrimp to an extent, though I don't think anarchists are retards. The PC thing does bother me, though, it's like that beautiful A//Political song "Obscene Gestures": "in another part, two factions face off, who's more PC? Who's more punk? Who's more violent? Who's more drunk?" It seems like political correctness is being pushed to the bleeding edge, by a lot more than just anarchists, too. 

No one may be encouraging white guilt here, but I've had that card played on me before. It's annoying, especially when it comes from the mouth of some idealistic college student. 

Honestly, I really don't see an anarchist revolution ever taking place. I just don't trust human nature enough for it to work.


----------



## whaleofashrimp

lobotomy3yes said:


> PC androgynous retards? Well you're an insensitive prick then aren't you? No one is encouraging "white guilt", but if you don't understand the concept of white privilege then I don't have much to say to you. You really think this is some sort of numbers game...As far as I'm concerned, if people aren't willing to shut up and listen, fuck em. This system is going to crash regardless, we're just trying to make it as nice as possible. Hopefully "the revolution" doesn't require planetary death and/or human extinction.



you know what? i dont understand it..i've never been in the position to oppress anyone in my goddamn life..so i'm not gonna go cry in the woods and piunch myself..i may be white but i'm not some snot nosed upper middle class kid trying to be poor because it's cool

if you cant win me over you cant win the majority over..and when you cant win the majority over..well shit..when it does collapse i'm gonna laugh
because all your illusions about what you think the "revolution will be"...he..i wont say there wrong..i'm just gonna say there as likely as the messiah knocking on my door and offering christmas ham
anythings possible in our quantum world

yeah i'm insensitive

because i'm sick and tired of theese little twats telling me i should feel shame
fuck that..i was rased on shame
no shame anymore


----------



## whaleofashrimp

i will admit androgynous does sound homophobic and antiitrans-gender
which i am against
if you know what i'm talking about you know what i'm talking about..otherwise we should discuss it over the phone or something


----------



## lobotomy3yes

Just by admitting that sounded homophobic, you've shown that you DO get what I am saying. That's what I mean by being "PC". When you say something that sounds wrong, or shows a bit of privilege, fess up. That's all it takes. No need to be shameful or anything, just understand where you might fuck up and then be open about it when you do.

No need to "act poor" like you said, and no need to act "PC". If everyone was willing to admit their shit like that, we wouldn't have the problems we do. So props to ya there. I can understand being pissed off at lifestylists and trendy anarchists (pisses me off too). I don't see how that applies to anarchists in general. Sadly it is usually the idiots who get the attention while the dedicated do all the work.

To clarify a bit, I don't think think it matters what the majority believes or not. The earth is still in a dire situation, and those who care must act regardless. Once the planet isn't about to be destroyed, then we can worry about all that other jazz.


----------



## connerR

I don't dislike anarchists, they at least aren't uncomfortable talking about politics/etc (just about everyone I run into these days), but I just think their ideas live in a world that isn't very realistic.


----------



## yarn and glue

connerR said:


> I just think their ideas live in a world that isn't very realistic.




In my mind, that's always been the point. Why settle for the accepted reality, the status quo? It's obviously only paying off for a minute percentage at the top (and arguably not working for them, either), so why not change it?

Here are the three most basic points all anarchists demand:

Direct Democracy;

Voluntary Association;

Mutual Aid.

So yeah, the tenets of anarchism might not be entirely realistic, but they're not exactly batshit insane, either -- no demands for More Dragons, or Personal Rocketships.

Alas, I continually run into this assumption that anarchists want a nation- or worldwide, violent revolution. Now, I have some ideas about where that rumor may have been generated, but in the end, that's what it is -- hearsay. My personal anarchist revolution is living on land where I can provide for myself and my community, and be accountable to no one but my friends and neighbors.

Crazy, I know.


----------



## lobotomy3yes

Man fuck realism. Shit would never change if we bought into that noise.

My personal motto is "What is is not what is possible."


----------



## Franny

yarn and glue said:


> Alas, I continually run into this assumption that anarchists want a nation- or worldwide, violent revolution. Now, I have some ideas about where that rumor may have been generated, but in the end, that's what it is -- hearsay. My personal anarchist revolution is living on land where I can provide for myself and my community, and be accountable to no one but my friends and neighbors.
> 
> Crazy, I know.



This is exactly why I think anarchism IS possible, because in my mind (and dreams), this is what anarchism is.

I've been enjoying watching this conversation, and just wanted to put in my two cents that violent revolution is some strange urban legend regarding the whole of anarchism, and personally I just want the freedom to take care of my damned self and the people in my community.


----------



## connerR

That sounds similar to libertarianism and it's something that I would support. But I still doubt it's possible. I think humans are engineered toward being oppressed by something or another.


----------



## Franny

connerR said:


> That sounds similar to libertarianism and it's something that I would support. But I still doubt it's possible. I think humans are engineered toward being oppressed by something or another.



Of course. But humans have to recognize their tendency towards being oppressed, learn to thwart it as much as possible, and beyond that learn to deal.

And I honestly think that if society was organized as groupings of smaller communities rather than operating on a global level under the rule of megacorporations, ridding ourselves of that need for oppression would be simpler.


----------



## whaleofashrimp

i should apologize about my earlyer post..i got in a fight with an anarchist friend earlier..thats nho excuse for name calling and mud slinging

what bothers me about anarchism is not the philosiphy, i agree with mutual supporting communities, but the anarchist themselves

people who are wrapped up in a belief to the point of unquestioning dogma are a bore
weather there religious rightists or leftists

dogma is the problem
and the inability to question your own beliefs or recognize certain facts and conditions that may contridict them

also it's the hair splitting that gets to me
instead of looking at the big picture..many are wrapped up in obsessing over theoretical nonesense..maybe it's because the big pictures to depressing to look at?


----------



## wartomods

oldmanLee said:


> Years ago,I stopped calling myself an anarchist,and you have just voiced so many of the reasons(yep,bull***t was rampant even in those ancient days!).I hope for the few that will read your "review",and come away thinking about what they can build;rather than what they can tear down.They will be the folks that actually help us a a species to have a better chance.



i agree.

Btw i dont agree with any anarchist ideology.


----------



## lobotomy3yes

whaleofashrimp said:


> i should apologize about my earlyer post..i got in a fight with an anarchist friend earlier..thats nho excuse for name calling and mud slinging
> 
> what bothers me about anarchism is not the philosiphy, i agree with mutual supporting communities, but the anarchist themselves
> 
> people who are wrapped up in a belief to the point of unquestioning dogma are a bore
> weather there religious rightists or leftists
> 
> dogma is the problem
> and the inability to question your own beliefs or recognize certain facts and conditions that may contridict them
> 
> also it's the hair splitting that gets to me
> instead of looking at the big picture..many are wrapped up in obsessing over theoretical nonesense..maybe it's because the big pictures to depressing to look at?


I think you are probably right about the big picture being too depressing. The future seems rather bleak. That is not why I don't discuss the big picture though. I have a hard time seeing any big picture. I am a detail person. I may find something interesting or point out some important detail, but I get way too lost in this stuff to ever come up with any coherent idea of what any big picture should look like. I'll leave that up to all you big picture people haha. 

Dogma is always an obstacle. It's even worse for anarchists, because isn't that kind of what we want to get away from in the first place? 

I think that it is pretty clear that anarchists in the West must return to "Propaganda of the Deed." Anarchists of the past saw the most success with action, but still not as successful as they had hoped to be. That's why we need to discuss these things really. To understand our limitations and advantages and to share ideas for making change. Many anarchists today aren't too concerned with this, and I am also frustrated by these people. Yes, it's not all about blowing things up or even tearing things down, but there comes a point where one need to step up to the plate and actually do something. There are those who think that by simply changing themselves they will change society. Don't get me wrong, personal change is a good thing. It is probably the first step to becoming a better anarchist too. It just can't stop there. Lifestylism isn't going to stop corporate terror and state atrocities. We have to do that ourselves. 

Assume that no one will act but you. Are your beliefs still worth acting for? For me, yes. If shit don't change, we are all fucked. Whether people listen or not, I can't just do nothing. That's already a given for me. I come to places such as these simply to discuss related subjects and gain new insights into the matter at hand. I am rather skeptical that banging heads against cops a la black bloc is doing anything other than releasing endorphins. A revolutionary coping mechanism. I have my own ideas for bringing about change which I will share upon request, just so no one thinks I'm just being overly critical. That stuff usually has a specific format to it.


----------



## Matt Derrick

this has been one of the most intelligent threads ive read on here in a while. thank you.


----------

