Authored by: exworker on Monday, November 12 2007 @ 01:28 PM CST

I'm very excited for this new book. CrimethInc., in my opinion, stands as one of the most exemplary anarchist publishers out there.

I've never given much weight to people who spend their time tearing apart others' efforts, and it's unfortunate that CrimethInc. has suffered this sort of nonsensical bickering in the past.

scott crow--Thanks for sharing that about your mom, that's great to hear! And thanks for the constructive criticism. I see your point about the transparency of who's behind the writing. However, I really feel that the benefits of keeping everything anonymous far outweigh whatever negative effects come from it. Decentralization helps to protect the writers from gaining celebrity status and strikes an important blow to intellectual property altogether. The myth-making aspect of things also makes one feel that anyone can do the things found in the pages of their books, not just "professionals".

Being an individual who has been involved in CrimethInc. projects, I can say that it has been an incredible tool for organizing in my community. We also had the privilege of hosting the first CrimethInc. convergence where I live years back, and it was one of the most inspiring things I've been apart of.

Of course, anyone who disagrees can and should start their own projects--maybe throw the CrimethInc. bullet on it and see what happens!

[ Reply to This | # ]

Authored by: communitycntrl on Monday, November 12 2007 @ 02:30 PM CST

crimethinc is great, first of all.

second, the critcisms coming from the more worker-centered anarchists have got me thinking that they need to put out a crimethinc style book about work, unions, etc. something simple, in today's language, with concrete ways people can act individually and collectively to free themselves from bosses and ultimately, work itself (and these solutions had better be more than just "join the OBU"). i think prole.info's "Abolish Restuarants" is a great step in this direction, if a little long for the average worker (or even me) to get through.

third, i just wanted to touch on the anonymity aspect of it. i personally have never had a problem with it, but as i was reading this article, especially the parts about mass media methods, and then reading the comment about anonimity, it struck me that without people knowing who you are, you can't be held accountable in any way by the actual community around you. i realize that this is something that is necessary/useful sometimes in the repressive place we call home, and that it has useful qualities for avoiding the creation of celebrity, but it has implications for alienation i think as well. the prblem is is that many times there is not an actual community around you to hold you accountable based on their own ideas of right and wrong for the specific situation and context, etc....
also, i think the problem of the creation of celebrity could be solved if writers were known AND there was an actual community they belonged to who already knew them and therefore would not abstact them into some type of one-dimensional super-hero/-villian based solely on their writing.

these thoughts are kinda more just about anonimity in general than spcifically about crimethinc, but it just got me thinking about alienation, mass media, face-to-face interaction and abstraction.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Authored by: Admin on Monday, November 12 2007 @ 03:37 PM CST

I was actually going to propose a "Recipes for Disaster" sequel on work-related tactics to CrimethInc last year. My idea was to do a joint DIY book on work/labor tactics between CrimethInc and Infoshop. Not sure how they would feel about the idea, but I have other book projects that need my attention.

Scott brings up a valid point about organizational transparency, but if your project is based on anonymity, this is a required trade-off. CrimethInc has been pretty open on their website and in reports published here and other places. I've always appreciated how CrimethInc has managed to keep a mostly anonymous publishing project going for so many years.

This is a wonderful example of putting certain anarchist ideas into action. With anonymity, you take the ego and careerism out of writing and publishing. People are forced to judge the words on their own merits. Some old habits die hard, so instead of attacking named people in the project, CrimethInc itself has been subject to some incredibly stupid strawman attacks. Anonymous publishing also put across the project as an egalitarian and decentralized network. Another good use of anarchist ideas.

I really don't see why accountability is relevant here. It's not like the CrimethInc organization is a central part of some community. It's an independent, autonomous project, whose members have a right to decide things in any way they see fit. They probably have a system of internal accountability anyway, so those of us outsiders really have no right expecting any kind of accountability from them, other than the usual method of public criticism being a form of accountability. We should also be wary of putting accountability on a pedestal, because it can quickly be used for authoritarian ends.

Chuck

[ Reply to This | # ]

Authored by: biofilo on Monday, November 12 2007 @ 05:31 PM CST

When you work anonymously, I think the trick is to be part of a
community, and accountable to it, over a long-running period of time, so
there are always people to give you feedback and keep you on track--
people who know you and have context for you, with whom you can be
open to criticism and honest rather than defensive.

In addition to that, an anonymous collective can be publicly
accountable--for example, take responsibility for errors, attempt to
engage in dialogue, etc.--without 'outing' any of the participants, should
they desire to retain their privacy.

Anyone who has done the long-term work to address conflicts in a
community knows that maintaining genuine accountability is serious,
demanding stuff, that it's pretty much the opposite of a lot of insulting
posts on an internet discussion forum. As anarchists, who should above
all be able to work out unnecessary, unhealthy conflicts, it's critical we
learn how to take responsibility for ourselves in such a way that we can
maintain long-term, nurturing relationships.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Authored by: AlexTrocchi on Tuesday, November 13 2007 @ 01:49 PM CST

I've long supported CrimethInc, and still do think they publish the best anarchist literature out there, but I do think it is the highest irony that only in the United States could people seemingly mistake a book publishing group to be a political movement - much less one that's "accountable". I'm not sure who or what CrimethInc could be accountable to, except their target demographic. Perhaps its time for people to stop reading about anarchy and awaiting the latest CrimethInc book, and start getting organized to create anarchy in the United States. It's a fundamentally depressing situation when this posts gets more attention than the no-border camp or the murder of an anti-fascist in Madrid by Nazis.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Authored by: Admin on Tuesday, November 13 2007 @ 03:21 PM CST

Yeah, it's possible to do accountability as an anonymous project. This would involve listening to criticism and responding to it.

But at the same time. I don't think Crimethinc should in any way be accountable to anybody other than the people within their organization. They aren't part of any community of any coherence. The anarchist movement is a community of sorts, but it doesn't have enough coherence to demand accountability from an independent organization. OK, maybe when Crimethinc does activism, that is one area where they should be accountable.

Infoshop.org insofar as it is a publishing project, doesn't have to answer to people. But we do provide this news wire and forums which are used by many anarchists, so with these services we have a responsibility to anarchist and radical movements.

Chuck

[ Reply to This | # ]

Authored by: corporatecrimina on Wednesday, November 14 2007 @ 11:14 AM CST

I recognize some benefits to anonymous publishing, but the most common one referenced is to avoid "celebrity" or "rock star" status. Do people really feel like that's an issue with anarchist publishing? Is someone like Cindy Milstein or Mark Lance an anarchist celebrity?

[ Reply to This | # ]