American anarchists meaninglessly devour themselves at Portland Conference

[J Ed]

I realise this is pure conspiracy theory and I don't have a shred of evidence to back this up, but part of me wonders whether intersectionality/privilege theory and that whole subculture is somehow being promoted by intelligence agencies in order to stop the left from organising effectively at a time when there was some potential to resonate with the general public.

I would like to believe this but I think it's one of those Hanlon's razor things.

 

[caleb]

God, the idea that this is all planned by the copppers to bring down the left, etc. What? A large part of the problem with this shit is not to prevent the left from "organising effectively", but because the left can't organise effectively at all, let alone to deal with incredibly complex and difficult issues like domestic violence within its own ranks, which is what this conflict arose from. With these groups so small, isolated and subcultural attempting to deal with that shit, it's no wonder this kind of thing happens.

 

[frogwoman]

the left is a subculture now, look at "okcomrade" (yeh im not joking)

 

[Rimbaud]

God, the idea that this is all planned by the copppers to bring down the left, etc. What? A large part of the problem with this shit is not to prevent the left from "organising effectively", but because the left can't organise effectively at all, let alone to deal with incredibly complex and difficult issues like domestic violence within its own ranks, which is what this conflict arose from. With these groups so small, isolated and subcultural attempting to deal with that shit, it's no wonder this kind of thing happens.

Nobody actually said that though to be fair.

 

[tufty79]

the left is a subculture now, look at "okcomrade" (yeh im not joking)

blimey

 

[ViolentPanda]

Statement by the event organisers about what happened if anyone is interested:

http://www.kristianwilliams.com/



I realise this is pure conspiracy theory and I don't have a shred of evidence to back this up, but part of me wonders whether intersectionality/privilege theory and that whole subculture is somehow being promoted by intelligence agencies in order to stop the left from organising effectively at a time when there was some potential to resonate with the general public. It does seem to have had that effect, but it is probably more symptom than cause of failure.

Interestingly enough, it sprung to dominance on the UK far left precisely at the moment that the tuition fees protests burned out. At the University I was at back then, while large demonstrations were still taking place, there was one occupation which was had a fairly practical function - it served as a centre for organising the necessary legwork involved in publicising the next demo, reaching out to trade unions, picketing lib dems, raising funds for transport, discussions and talks and so on. After the last major demo ended, momentum had wound down and the bulk of students lost interest, there was then a second occupation, now based on "safe space" principles (first time I heard the word) and was far smaller, more exclusive, inward looking and didn't seem to serve any particular function as such, with an emphasis on form over content. This then preceded a series of lefty fall outs and the scene went from solidarity to toxicity soon after.

My point is it seems like this sort of thing is what happens when you have people wanting to engage in radical politics but without any particular mass movement or groundswell of unrest to attach on to. I can't imagine this sort of thing being big in Spain or Greece for example where there are actually things happening outside for the radical milieu to focus their attention on.

This iteration of identity politics is merely the most recent in a fairly long chain of iterations, the earliest stemming from feminist analyses of the exclusion from feminism of the majority of non-white, non-middle class women, whose concerns weren't the same as those of the hegemons. I'm not sure we can blame the state for it, as the only people to blame are those who set store by principles that actively work to exclude.
30 years ago, people were excluded if they couldn't proudly pre-fix their view with "speaking as a (insert qualifier here)". Now they're excluded if their qualifier doesn't fit a particular set of middle class preconceptions.

Plus ça change....

 

[DaveCinzano]

the left is a subculture now, look at "okcomrade" (yeh im not joking)

No sects before marriage

 

[Pickman's model]

God, the idea that this is all planned by the copppers to bring down the left, etc. What? A large part of the problem with this shit is not to prevent the left from "organising effectively", but because the left can't organise effectively at all, let alone to deal with incredibly complex and difficult issues like domestic violence within its own ranks, which is what this conflict arose from. With these groups so small, isolated and subcultural attempting to deal with that shit, it's no wonder this kind of thing happens.

out of curiosity, how would you have "the left" "deal with incredibly complex and difficult issues like domestic violence within its own ranks"?

 

[caleb]

the left is a subculture now, look at "okcomrade" (yeh im not joking)

Yeah, good example.

And what you have in this case is members of a subculture attempting to deal with abuse that took place within that subculture (as it does outside of it, of course) through subcultural means. Failing to do that in a way people are happy with (quelle surprise) and having a fall out over it. Not to sound glib.

out of curiosity, how would you have "the left" "deal with incredibly complex and difficult issues like domestic violence within its own ranks"?

Probably with help from external sources who know what the fuck they're doing.

 

[Pickman's model]

Probably with help from external sources who know what the fuck they're doing.

oh, you mean right wing sources

 

[butchersapron]

God, the idea that this is all planned by the copppers to bring down the left, etc. What? A large part of the problem with this shit is not to prevent the left from "organising effectively", but because the left can't organise effectively at all, let alone to deal with incredibly complex and difficult issues like domestic violence within its own ranks, which is what this conflict arose from. With these groups so small, isolated and subcultural attempting to deal with that shit, it's no wonder this kind of thing happens.

Thing is, cops etc don't need to be directly involved - they can help set the tone and context of how people react to and deal with situations. They don't need to be involved in every single specific instance in order to help make the most damaging ways acceptable or even the basic common sense of people involved. I think The bloke they were attacking is someone who has written about how this works. Which, i think, is worth considering.

 

[ViolentPanda]

out of curiosity, how would you have "the left" "deal with incredibly complex and difficult issues like domestic violence within its own ranks"?

I suppose we might start with "The People vs Martin Smith" in the Peoples' Court.

 

[caleb]

oh, you mean right wing sources like the police

I think I would trust, say, an established domestic violence service to deal with domestic violence better than some North American anarchists.

 

[Pickman's model]

I think I would trust, say, an established domestic violence service to deal with domestic violence better than some North American anarchists.

i'm sure you would. but i understand "the left" to be a rather broader church than "north american anarchists" or "the swp" or whatnot. what you're saying, is that "the left" cannot sort its house out about its internal matters and therefore, on a broader level, cannot hope to prefigure a socialist, communist or indeed anarchist future - more, that it needs the forces of darkness to root out offenders within it now.

 

[caleb]

i'm sure you would. but i understand "the left" to be a rather broader church than "north american anarchists" or "the swp" or whatnot. what you're saying, is that "the left" cannot sort its house out about its internal matters and therefore, on a broader level, cannot hope to prefigure a socialist, communist or indeed anarchist future - more, that it needs the forces of darkness to root out offenders within it now.

Nah, I mean the left pretty much as a whole. The SWP didn't even enter my thought process when I wrote that: I think the left as a whole is a subculture, a very small and isolated one at that. Now there might be individuals and organisations in there that I like and admire, but that doesn't mean I would trust them dealing with this shit if that meant setting up "people's courts" and providing counselling or whatever. And that only bears any reflection on the prefiguring of a "socialist, communist or indeed anarchist future" if you think it'll be the left as it currently is which makes that future, and I don't think it will be.

 

[Rimbaud]

Thing is, cops etc don't need to be directly involved - they can help set the tone and context of how people react to and deal with situations. They don't need to be involved in every single specific instance in order to help make the most damaging ways acceptable or even the basic common sense of people involved. I think The bloke they were attacking is someone who has written about how this works. Which, i think, is worth considering.

Do you have a link to the thing he wrote about how that works, or could you give an example of how they can set the tone and context off the top of your head?

 

[butchersapron]

Do you have a link to the thing he wrote about how that works, or could you give an example of how they can set the tone and context off the top of your head?

I think the thing dave linked to (pdf) is a pretty good example of tone setting.

 

[Horas]

despite all the real problems that i have had with Leninist type groups, whenever i have got involved with anarchist/semi-anarchist ones, they seem to have even more problems. the odd thing i have found with anarchist groups in my flirting with them ( and not more, i do not pretend to be an expert, and i realise there are diffferences between groups and tendencies ) is that they are really far more authoritarian than any Leninists, but in a different way. ie where you can shop, what you can eat, what words you can use, what you can wear etc. together with a whole set of words to shoot people down who are a bit different. i was called a 'speciesist' once or twice, for eating greggs sausage rolls near the wrong people. i read an article on occupy a while ago, and, to paraphrase the conclusion, the article said that many people left the occupy movement with a strong desire to see an authoritarian heirarchal leadership. i had the same experience, as the attempts of being horizontal etc, also wasted a lot of time and allowed for a lot of plain stupidity. i do not want to start a marxist vs anarchist thead, i realise the problems on the other side too. but just saying, the anarchist horizontal supposedly libertarian type of organisation doesn't seem to really work.

 

[butchersapron]

Which anarchist groups were you involved with?

 

[DaveCinzano]

i was called a 'speciesist' once or twice, for eating greggs sausage rolls near the wrong people.

Not sure that's really evidence of ‘authoritarianness’, anarchistic or otherwise! That's just a disagreement over a sausage roll as far as I can tell.

Or was the sausage roll violently wrested from your hand? Were you beaten for this dietary transgression? Forced to kneel before your group and self-critique through the tears? Were you locked in a windowless room until you admitted your failure? Or worse - was it the silent treatment until the day you (fortunately) discovered the mercury-tilt switch under your car?

Or was it literally - literally - you eating a sausage roll, a vegan calling you ‘speciesist’, and then everyone moving onto a conversation about the weather or somesuch?

 

[frogwoman]

I didn't think the twittetsectionalists were anarchists?

 

[Nigel Irritable]

I didn't think the twittetsectionalists were anarchists?

In the US that politics is predominantly radical liberal, strong on campuses and amongst leftish NGOs. As a lot of US anarchism exists in a similar milieu and shades into radical liberalism in its own politics, this stuff is increasingly hegemonic amongst anarchists there.

In Britain the whole thing is smaller as there isn't really the same kind of very strong radical liberal milieu. It isn't nearly as influential amongst anarchists as a whole, but a larger portion of its loudest activists are self-proclaimed anarchists. I'd reckon at least a third of the twitter types most strongly identified with it describe themselves that way. Anarchist organisations are more resistant to it than unorganised "scene" anarchists, with the perhaps surprising exception of the WSM.

 

[Nigel Irritable]

The degree of censoriousness is the most interesting thing about the incident.

The target of the protest is not accused of carrying out any kind of assault or physical or sexual abuse. Nor of advocating or condoning such things. Nor was he speaking on the controversial issues. The argument seems to be that people who hold "incorrect" opinions on call out culture or on how activist groups should deal with allegations are not just wrong but so dangerous that they should not be allowed to speak on any subject.

 

[caleb]

It's more complex than that. Yeah, there was nothing particularly wrong with his article, some of it was pretty spot-on and none of it warranted this response, nor accusations of being a rape apologist, etc. but Williams wrote the article in the aftermath of an incident which had already seen a pretty big fall-out within that particular scene. It's not as if his piece was completely disconnected from real life occurrences and just a passive reflection on call-out culture.

Again, that's not to justify this, but the focus here seems to be off - the issue is small subcultural scene-based politics, of which intersectionalism is just one form.

 

[Nigel Irritable]

It's more complex than that. Yeah, there was nothing particularly wrong with his article, some of it was pretty spot-on and none of it warranted this response, nor accusations of being a rape apologist, etc. but Williams wrote the article in the aftermath of an incident which had already seen a pretty big fall-out within that particular scene. It's not as if his piece was completely disconnected from real life occurrences and just a passive reflection on call-out culture.

This seems to be true - there were underlying tensions about an "accountability process" amongst local anarchoid activists.

Again, that's not to justify this, but the focus here seems to be off - the issue is small subcultural scene-based politics, of which intersectionalism is just one form.

By contrast, I'd take the point of view that fallings out amongst US anarchist subcultural types are of almost no interest except in so far as they illustrate the growth and results of certain political ideas and methods that originated in the US and are gathering some influence here. "Subcultural scenes are prone to internecine feuds" isn't really a controversial or interesting point.

 

[butchersapron]

It's more complex than that. Yeah, there was nothing particularly wrong with his article, some of it was pretty spot-on and none of it warranted this response, nor accusations of being a rape apologist, etc. but Williams wrote the article in the aftermath of an incident which had already seen a pretty big fall-out within that particular scene. It's not as if his piece was completely disconnected from real life occurrences and just a passive reflection on call-out culture.

Again, that's not to justify this, but the focus here seems to be off - the issue is small subcultural scene-based politics, of which intersectionalism is just one form.

Who gets to decide what is the proper context here? Your 'but' suggests that the idiots here should as least get a hearing or voice in determining what is the context. And so by extension, who they will allows to take part in politics or not. Fuck that shit.

 

[caleb]

Who gets to decide what is the proper context here? Your 'but' suggests that the idiots here should as least get a hearing or voice in determining what is the context. And so by extension, who they will allows to take part in politics or not. Fuck that shit.

I don't mean it like that, to be clear. I'm just offering what I've heard from people in no way sympathetic to those in the video who know more about the situation than, I'm guessing, most of us. Basic point has been fuck those guys, but Kristian Williams isn't the 'good guy' here either and probably should have known better, given the fall-out that had already occurred at the point he published his piece. That doesn't make them 'right' or mean that we shouldnt find the video mad or whatever, I'm just saying it wasn't an out of the blue occurrence with no background.

 

[cesare]

Here's a pastebin version of some of the facebook "Shut down Kristian Williams!" campaign leading up to the conference incident: http://pastebin.com/LsmM3N4t

 

[8ball]

Here's a pastebin version of some of the facebook "Shut down Kristian Williams!" campaign leading up to the conference incident: http://pastebin.com/LsmM3N4t

Silence him - he's silencing people!!!

 

[butchersapron]

I don't mean it like that, to be clear. I'm just offering what I've heard from people in no way sympathetic to those in the video who know more about the situation than, I'm guessing, most of us. Basic point has been fuck those guys, but Kristian Williams isn't the 'good guy' here either and probably should have known better, given the fall-out that had already occurred at the point he published his piece. That doesn't make them 'right' or mean that we shouldnt find the video mad or whatever, I'm just saying it wasn't an out of the blue occurrence with no background.

Who said there's a good guy. The event organisers invited him. These dopes decided that they get to police who other people - nominally on their side - get to invite to speak. His knowing these dicks would act like dicks changes nothing. Explaining the 'background' doesn't help either.