Unthinking respect for authority is the greatest enemy of truth

Welcome to Infoshop News
Tuesday, February 09 2010 @ 06:36 PM UTC

Several Conclusions On The Identity Crises

Anarchist OpinionCapitalism has pixelated the definition of anarchy, anarchism and anarchists. Each pixel has been singled out, rendered into a commodity, and then discarded. Like the schizophrenic, who cannot prevent the onslaught of random stimuli from influencing their reality, the capitalist mind is trained to long for the pixelated idea, to ingest it, to let its meaning irrelevantly diffuse through its I-pod headphones, and then forget it. The capitalist mind travels through each commodity like a worm through and apple. Every playlist gets tired. The next song must be downloaded. All of the anarchist songs are old. It is time for the next commodity. If we can see and accept that anarchy has become a commodity, we must accept several other conclusions.

I: All who visually signify themselves to be anarchists are not always anarchists. When image becomes the unifying force, the power of the ideas themselves as unifying forces decreases. Over time, what is easiest becomes all that unites the anarchist. It is easier to attend a 'show' than it is to do nothing for a week but make money for a project which might fail. It is easier to shatter a glass window than it is to meet ones neighbors. It is easier to live in isolation than it is to create a neighborhood in which all who would ever commit an illegal act were protected, a neighborhood which regulates itself, a neighborhood which does not devour itself.

II: The large audiences that mass media can reach are byproducts of capitalist saturation techniques. There is a reason the Nike logo can be recognized outside the city where its headquarters is located. The wider the image is diffused, the more people will recognize it. But this only works, and is designed only to work, for easily palatable images and ideas. Democracy is good because democracy works because voting works and so, in the future, vote. Coca-Cola is good because Coca-Cola is better than Pepsi because Pepsi is a competitor so, if you would like to, drink Coca-Cola. The more complex the message, the less it will be understood, the more it will be stripped down to resemble a Coca-Cola ad. Mass audiences, as we understand them today, were created to consume mass-produced commodities. Under capitalism, all commodities must compete. Anarchy, diffused through the filters of mass media, will become a mass-produced commodity. Different anarchist commodities will war with each other, attempting to secure the largest number of consumers. From this conclusion, we return to the first conclusion: It is just as easy to drink Coke as it is to be an anarchist. Mass-anarchy will always be the anarchy of least resistance.

III: Every attempt to spread anarchist ideas outside of a limited geographical area will be doomed to spread a non-specific, easily replicated set of 'anarchist' practices. Transmitted in an impersonal manner, anarchist ideas will be understood in an impersonal manner. Every geographical area is distinct in resources, configuration and density. All that make these areas identical is their connection with each other via capitalist saturation techniques. If the goal of the anarchist is to contribute to the building of communities that are self-regulating and self-sustaining, the anarchist must disengage from what regulates and sustains the current community: mass-diffusion.

IV: In order to secure money or sustenance, an anarchist must directly trade in portions of their existence for a wage. If the anarchist steals or grows their own food, if the anarchist builds their own house or illegally occupies one, they must still spend portions of their existence doing so. All efforts to survive requires effort. In theory, anarchists are committed to sharing their resources. In practice, this sharing of resources does not usually take place beyond the walls of anarchist houses or buildings. In practice, this sharing is exclusive to anarchists. Rather than allow only themselves to have free time, the anarchist should begin asking others if they would like to have more free time. Two neighboring houses will have more free hours in the day than a single house. It is important that, however an anarchist chooses to facilitate this freeing up of time, they do not present another commodity to those next door.
If an anarchist reduces this sharing to a defined set of practices, it will be disregarded as unpaid labor.

V: An anarchist should not relate to other people as an anarchist. The word anarchist, as a signifier, has become the same as the words democrat, patriot or citizen. A self-identifying anarchist is another chess piece of the mass-media. An anarchist can be singled out and identified on a television screen, just as a punk can. To be recognized as an anarchist is to be neutralized as an anarchist. To be perceived as an anarchist is condemning oneself to only being what an anarchist is commonly perceived to be. Everything which is perceived as a commodity will be treated as a commodity: temporal, dispensable, replaceable. This is the grand trick of capitalism. As many have noticed before, capitalism will attempt to sell everything. It will gladly sell anything which wanders into its nets.

VI: If we can accept that the words anarchy, anarchist and anarchism signify a commodity to the people who hear those words, we can also accept that it is best to abandon the words. There is no way to remove ourselves from this crisis of identity. We must continue our practices, whatever they may be, but we must do them anonymously. We can still have goals, but they do not need to be spoken of. The only way we can achieve our goals is if they are common goals. Goals that are shared because of silence rather than words. If the goal does not need to be spoken of, it is usually because it is obvious to everyone who seeks it. The simpler a goal, the easier it is to accomplish. Working less, sharing more and thus having more time for ones existence are simple goals, in no need of anarchist endorsement.

VII: If four city blocks all begin to share what they have at their disposal, there is no reason why the eight surrounding blocks cannot also begin to share in a similar manner. The rewards in time spent free from buying commodities, working and surviving will either be there or they will not exist. One should work for a wage as rarely as possible and instead work to strengthen the general availability of people to each other. Childcare when needed, constant acquisition of available free food, reliable and genuine emotional support and being self-regulating in regards to violence and abuse are good starting points. What is vital is the free time itself. Without free time, a person can barely question their situation, let alone change it. This free time does not imply leisure as it does for some, but rather a determination to support that which allowed the free time: collective resources. This implies people supporting each other without having to agree on anything other than to receive and give support. Ideological unity is not necessary for this. But unity in goals is necessary. As was said before, the simpler the goal, the easier it is to accomplish.

Conclusion:

Be invisible.

Really.

Now.

Trackback

Trackback URL for this entry: http://news.infoshop.org/trackback.php?id=20091104215120611

No trackback comments for this entry.
Several Conclusions On The Identity Crises | 21 comments | Create New Account
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
Several Conculsions On The Identity Crises
Authored by: Marja on Thursday, November 05 2009 @ 02:43 AM UTC
Some of these conclusions seem, at best, dubious to me. Particularly V and parts of VII. Not all people relate the same ways. I am an introvert and need time to get away from other people to relax. I could not live if it meant being available to other people at all times. So at this time, I can only say modus tollens.

Sorry to post and run but I was hit by an SUV and my right elbow is sprained, and it is very hard for me to type right now.
Several Conculsions On The Identity Crises
Authored by: communitycntrl on Thursday, November 05 2009 @ 04:43 PM UTC
I hope you feel better soon. I and too many of my friends have been hit by cars.
Take care!
Several Conculsions On The Identity Crises
Authored by: biofilo on Thursday, November 05 2009 @ 03:05 AM UTC
I'm really tired of texts that make a bunch of universal broad-brush statements, being absolutist about everything, rather than humbly acknowledging the strengths and shortcomings of different approaches. It's not mature, it erases nuance, it produces ideology rather than insight.

Seriously, you think we can find common cause with others by keeping silent about our goals and politics? Some dumb ideas you have to be dumb to believe, but some REALLY dumb ideas you have to be really smart to somehow talk yourself into. This seems like one of those. Common reference points (and goals!) arise from communication.

Though perhaps, you're right, not from ultra-mediated anonymous communication. Like this essay, and this response.
Several Conculsions On The Identity Crises
Authored by: Annie Nimmety on Thursday, November 05 2009 @ 12:48 PM UTC
1)

"Hi, I'm an anarchist. Would you like me to extend solidarity to you and provide day care for your children while also teaching them basic ideas about mutual aid and anarchism?"

2)

"Hey, Mary. You know...if you ever need, I can watch your kids."

Both of these people are anarchists. They are both communicating. Only one will end up watching the kids. Which one will it be? The anarchist? Or the person?
Several Conculsions On The Identity Crises
Authored by: biofilo on Thursday, November 05 2009 @ 01:58 PM UTC
So yeah, use common sense, be a real person, duh.

But you might be able to get a little further towards collective liberation if you're also able to articulate broader critique of hierarchy. And words--perhaps even such as "anarchist"--might sometimes be useful for that.

The above critique doesn't resonate at all with my experiences locally. We did all sorts of stuff during the anti-war era in which we weren't explicitly using the A-word, and whatever we achieved was easily absorbed by our enemies (who branded it for themselves). Being explicit about what we want has been really useful.
Several Conculsions On The Identity Crises
Authored by: Annie Nimmety on Thursday, November 05 2009 @ 04:28 PM UTC
How?
Several Conculsions On The Identity Crises
Authored by: communitycntrl on Thursday, November 05 2009 @ 04:56 PM UTC
On this, I would say a good place for this type of discussion is under this article, which talks all about radical community organizing.
Driven From Below: A Look at Tenant Organizing and the New Gentrification
http://news.infoshop.org/article.php?...3153353794

that article looks at groups who have anarchist politics but don't talk about theory that isn't rooted in people's day-to-day personal experiences.
it has some good points, and some flaws (like long-term work that focuses on making minor reforms, even if done in an anarchist way...).
but this point here is pretty good and kinda address the question of whether to talk anarchism or just critically analyze power and let people come to their own conlcusions:
"Methodology

Popular education is also foundational in the methodology of both organizations, closely intertwined as it is with the idea of being driven from below. Based on Paolo Freire’s work and writings, in essence it is a way of collectively building knowledge. It is a teaching methodology that rejects the idea of a student as a vessel to be filled with knowledge, but rather sees a process of learning as an interaction between student and teacher, growing out of the student’s lived experience. It is a collective process of learning, as well as a fundamentally political process of asking why the world is the way that it is, and how we can act together to transform it. Popular education as the basis for a method of organizing that builds critical consciousness and leads to concrete change is exemplified in this quote from Leonardo:



“ … I think the role of organizer, and I would slash it with organizer /popular educator/facilitator/animator is to bring people together to reflect on their reality, to define their reality, and then based on their own experience and their own condition, to seek for ways to change it in an organized way that deals with the social, economic, political, ideological, race and gender dimensions within the world. To get there the point of departure is the practice of being able to describe your world. …”

What the popular educator brings to the conversation is the ability to move the description of the world to a critical analysis by asking questions, to move a conversation to an act of transformation. It does not mean remaining trapped in the initial world of students, circling, in the words of Freire, “like moths around a light bulb.” Their experience is only the starting point.


In this way, people “learn to learn,” they learn to deconstruct their environment and layers of oppression, and find themselves as creative and critical individuals able to act upon and change the world. It is for organizers to identify the teachable moments as they arise in the work, to leverage the daily struggles into a greater consciousness of the world and the underlying forces that have created it.



“ … As organizers and popular educators, anything that the community talks about we see as a point of departure to do a social, political and economic analysis of the world. Anything can do it, a stoplight in an alley can take you to the issues of safety in the community and the need for light illumination and gangs and problems in the community and the social problems that come with gangs and you can follow that thread. Or you can talk about the budgetary reasons why they don't want to put those lights and how the budget is allocated and where the priorities are and why they choose to put more police instead of more lights on the street and you can have a conversation on that. Or it can take you to going to the local neighborhood watch and asking the chief of police to sign a letter asking for new lights and finding out that the chief of police doesn't care about putting lights on the street but only about putting people in jail so it leads you to understand the relation of power within the city, within the community, and the police and so on and so forth. So we use that a lot, we use these little moments, these situations, as tools to analyze the whole. … ”

Leonardo’s description of identifying and using the teachable moment illustrates the key to popular education as a constant practice. An invaluable way of both adding theory to lived experience in a way that prioritizes one but values both, and of reflecting on past experience to build more effective campaigns in the future in a continually expanding spiral of experience, theory, and action."

and

"The meetings began growing as people realized that they either had to fight or leave their homes. At the second meeting we began our analysis by putting a piece of paper on the wall and drawing a little cartoon building in the middle. And then we began to draw out who had power over the building. It started with the owners of course, and that is where most people’s initial analysis ended. We didn’t know a lot about the owners at that point, except that everyone had heard they owned a lot of buildings. So we asked the question, who has power over the owners?

And then we began an analysis of the city, drawing out the different structures of the Housing Department and the City Attorney’s Office. Over these we added the city council, made up of 15 elected representatives, the Mayor, and the City Attorney (another elected position in L.A.). We also looked at the County Health Department, and the County Board of Supervisors. We drew in the different state and city laws that protected tenants. And we looked at the city’s accountability to its residents, and the tenant’s own leverage over the owners.

We returned to this drawing to deepen collective analysis of the role and effectiveness of the city as we filed complaints on violations of rent control and habitability regulations."
Several Conculsions On The Identity Crises
Authored by: LopezSection on Thursday, November 05 2009 @ 04:46 PM UTC
"Common reference points" spoke the sophist.

More or less finding common cause is simply having the most vulgar associative traces spat back upon oneself -e.g. "I'm an anarchist... I agree, I agree, I agree". It seems not to be such a "REALLY dumb" idea to try to disavow absurd categorical references which repeatedly serve to reinforce collective banality and mass-comformism.

The signifier is as implanted in the commodity racket as anything else; the political economy of the sign finds itself to be the distinguishing factor of anarchist "communities" (what an idiotic "universal broad-brush" concept; I propose we drop this one as well, for there is no "community" anywhere, excepting the disgusting little ideology of blood and soil) wherein the individual - owning certain 'anarchist' commodities and special edition publications, owning certain banal experiences of breaking shit and drinking in foreign cities, owning arrest records and court dates - happens to constitute lack (lacking anything of substance is the watchword of comformism), and buttresses the lack with the fine distinction of ideology, anarchism as ideology. Belonging as politics. Politics as a chain of empty signifiers, with quilting points distinguished as signs charged with a hegemonic function.

You say "Common reference points (and goals!)", and I hear "I feel great when others repeat the same words, I feel great when others can be convinced of my political strategy!".

The leviathan is dead, and hegemony fills the vacuum. The politicians of the anarchist circus prance about, easily frightened at the simplest insistence that the 'name of the signifier' is not so important.






Several Conculsions On The Identity Crises
Authored by: communitycntrl on Thursday, November 05 2009 @ 04:58 PM UTC
barf. if community is dead, fascism is the only option, because it means a war of all against all.
Several Conculsions On The Identity Crises
Authored by: Admin on Thursday, November 05 2009 @ 06:50 PM UTC
"Politics as a chain of empty signifiers, with quilting points distinguished as signs charged with a hegemonic function."

Somebody has been to graduate school!

Chuck
Several Conculsions On The Identity Crises
Authored by: blackhand on Thursday, November 05 2009 @ 09:03 PM UTC
hell yeah! grad students and big words out of our scene!
Several Conculsions On The Identity Crises
Authored by: socraticpunk on Sunday, November 08 2009 @ 04:54 AM UTC
Yeah, let's all be a homogeneous blob of ignorant children! That'll show Capitalism, Patriarchy, Homophobia, and the State what for. Sorry, homogeneous: all the same, lacking variation; Capitalism: the economic system by which costs are minimized to maximize profits; wait, I guess I'm not welcome here...
Several Conculsions On The Identity Crises
Authored by: CashMoney on Saturday, November 07 2009 @ 03:22 PM UTC
Wrong.
Several Conculsions On The Identity Crises
Authored by: veranasi on Thursday, November 05 2009 @ 10:00 PM UTC
Couple things that have been popping up in my circle: 1. politics is incredibly alienating, so, the separation from normal people is useful on a basic human level 2. people hate anarchists because anarchists are lazy and whine too much. i think anonymity is important, but so is integrity. as for community, without friends, you have only enemies and embody ideology
Several Conculsions On The Identity Crises
Authored by: veranasi on Thursday, November 05 2009 @ 10:13 PM UTC
point one needs clarification: the separation of politics from normal people is useful.
Several Conculsions On The Identity Crises
Authored by: AgentOrangeFAI on Thursday, November 05 2009 @ 06:48 PM UTC
I don't know about anyone else here... but this seems to me to fall exactly into the kind of net anonymous is talking about. I'm new here, so I don't know if this is the kind of stuff you guys talk about or why this was put in the news section, but when this guy/gal says from his soapbox "We must not do the whole mass-media thing, mass media is teh sux," does he not realize that this is a mass medium?

Not to mention he spelled "Conculsions" wrong.
Several Conclusions On The Identity Crises
Authored by: lettersjournal on Saturday, November 07 2009 @ 02:55 PM UTC
The strategic proposals of the American insurrectionists essentially amount to Food Not Bombs and summit protests. This article argues for some variation of the former (circulating free food - but anonymously!), while most argue for the latter.

There has been no break from activism.
Several Conclusions On The Identity Crises
Authored by: Annie Nimmety on Saturday, November 07 2009 @ 04:47 PM UTC
I think this article is proposing that people share everything within a specific geographical area. It's pretty specific. Start with a small area, a city block, and share what you have. They say the most important thing is time. The freeing up of time for and in other people. They say, very specifically, that the free time is the most vital thing.

I don't think they are carrying on where Food Not Bombs left off. They are recognizing that there is no longer a need or desire for specific, activist-based projects. Would you re-read the text and then respond, Letters Journal?
Several Conclusions On The Identity Crises
Authored by: lettersjournal on Saturday, November 07 2009 @ 05:47 PM UTC
I did read the text. Despite all of the bluster, it arrives at a conclusion not very far away from the mentality behind Rainbow Gatherings or Food Not Bombs but without the accumulated cultural capital that allows those things to succeed (on their own terms).

Nothing proposed here is antagonistic to capitalism. Schemes to share food, childcare, and so on allow people to be reproduced as workers for a lower wage. Creating friendly neighborhoods is good for property value.
Several Conclusions On The Identity Crises
Authored by: Annie Nimmety on Saturday, November 07 2009 @ 05:55 PM UTC
Okay.

But perhaps you are projecting a program into their conclusions. They are not saying everyone should provide their neighbors with childcare. They are saying people should provide free time for each other. This includes (according to the thing above) time spent free from work, away from wage slavery. This is a precious thing, to me.

I can't think of anyone who is close to being able to just stop working, en masse. A lot of models have failed because they assume everyone can just stop working. From what is written above, it seems like they firstly want to provide the space for people to know what it feels like to not work for a second. Most people like not working, I know that much myself. Anyway, what do you think?
Several Conclusions On The Identity Crises
Authored by: lettersjournal on Saturday, November 07 2009 @ 08:42 PM UTC
I don't think I'm projecting anything. It's all in the text:

One should work for a wage as rarely as possible and instead work to strengthen the general availability of people to each other. Childcare when needed, constant acquisition of available free food, reliable and genuine emotional support and being self-regulating in regards to violence and abuse are good starting points.

This is Rainbow Gatheringism. The dream of a utopia within capitalism is a dream that will never be realized. The things in this list are presented casually as "starting points", but they are pie-in-the-sky, unless one has a lot of money or property (say, you could live on an inherited farm in rural France...). Even then, I am skeptical.

What is work? Watching my neighbors' kids and constantly acquiring free food, not to mention emotionally supporting my fucked up neighbors would be considerably more draining and horrible than my job. I don't even know what self-regulating abuse and violence in my neighborhood would mean, but if the self-regulating you envision is at all similar to how the anarchists I know "solve" most problems, count me out.

At the end of the day, these proposals would double or triple the amount of work I do. The anonymity/invisibility stuff seems like a fancy packaging for the same old activist daydreamss.