Fozzie Bear
Well-Known Member
Happy Birthday AnarCom Network 
Are you an anarchist but not a member of an anarchist organisation?
- Thread starter danny la rouge
- Start date
hitmouse
so defeated, thinks it's funny
Looks alright in my browser? Anyway, Class Report 23 is fine but I hope they won't miss the chance to use Second Annual Report for the next one.
danny la rouge
More like *fanny* la rouge!
With an “industrial introduction”?
Dom Traynor
Tino Pai
Hang on it's on the same line for me
danny la rouge
More like *fanny* la rouge!
The website?
Just the image you posted.
danny la rouge
More like *fanny* la rouge!
Oh that. That’s just the Insta story. It was only meant to be around for 24 hours.
Dom Traynor
Tino Pai
Weird not for me
danny la rouge
More like *fanny* la rouge!
A Festive 20 from AnarCom Net.
A380
How do I change this 'custom title' thing then?
A Festive 20 from AnarCom Net.
Should have found four more and done it as an advent calendar. Amateurs.
This is interesting. It might be good if you could elaborate as I've heard before that formal organisations are not all they're cracked up to be, which sort of combines with the late Alfredo Bonanno's critique of them.
I'm not one for such organisations myself, I've never really been able to see what they're actually for and they don't seem to have much of a purpose or really any influence or impact these days either.
Last edited:
charlie mowbray
The Enforcer
That is just nonsense. For example, the ACG has a heavy publishing programme, bringing out a whole slew of cheap pamphlets, one of the best theoretical/historical libertarian magazines in the English language, as well as the only long-running free libertarian newsheet in the UK. Formal organisations like the Federation Anarchiste and the Union Communiste Libertaire in France produce very long running monthly publications, the FA has a network of bookshops throughout France, and a radio station that broadcasts daily throughout the French speaking world, not to mention the influence of French libertarian organisations on struggles in both the workplace and the neighbourhood.Similarly with the Frederaziona Anarchica Italiana, which produces a very long running weekly newspaper and has had an influence on workplace and neighbourhood struggles, the anti-militarist movement and the anti-clerical movement. What have the insurrectionists done exactly?
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
Fucked shit up perhaps
Fozzie Bear
Well-Known Member
It’s certainly one nil to the insurrectionists in terms of attacking phone masts in Bristol.
Also in terms of writing, they are well ahead in the flowery manifesto stakes.
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
I'm not sure of the value of long-running journals that are not linked to action irl.
charlie mowbray
The Enforcer
Who says they're not linked to action?
Fozzie Bear
Well-Known Member
Yeah I think this depends on what we mean by action really, which is perhaps a good conversation to have.
Personally I think that journals that purely provide analysis are fine, as a lot of people can benefit from help with understanding the world and how it might be different.
I also think that a plurality of approaches is kind of inevitable really and should probably be welcomed except for the obviously stupid stuff (which I am sure people will disagree on).
Some people will be inspired into action by a journal and some people will be forced into action because of the circumstances they find themselves in, or because they get invited along to something by some mates.
In terms of the ACG material, I assume their argument would be that readers can get involved with ACG groups near them or participate in local struggles and encourage an anti-authoritarian / direct action approach to the issue.
hitmouse
so defeated, thinks it's funny
Also, sadly underreported in English, but the Chilean insurrectionary anarchist Joaquín García ending up at the same prison as Pinochet's former head of intelligence and getting to headbutt him is one of those stories that makes me smile whenever I remember it.
kenny g
Sheeple Awake!
[drunk waffle]
Last edited:
From what I've heard about formal organisations, Bonanno was right about them. No doubt affinity groups are much better and are the real anarchist way, with genuine decentralisation and other benefits to them. That's what we need in terms of organisation IMO.
kenny g
Sheeple Awake!
Fuck off.
Make me
Not that I intend to stick around this ridiculously and unnecessarily intolerant and hostile, spiteful place anyway.
You've all got sticks stuck firmly right up your arses and none of you can get them out.
kenny g
Sheeple Awake!
[DRUNK WAFFLE]
Last edited:
Personal? In what way? And why tell me to "fuck off"? You're behaving strangely.
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
You were saying that last time remember and made a right arse of yourself then - you've a cheek coming back here and acting like a ringpiece
I know someone who used to be a dedicated member of the ACG. They told me that the ACG has a transphobia problem. They explained it to me. A couple of members started posting blatantly transphobic stuff on the internal forums and stuff in defense of and in praise of Helen Steel. Some other members expressed concern about it and wanted something to be done. But absolutely nothing was done about it. This led to some people leaving (who later on founded the AnarCom Network).
A bit later on a couple of other ACG members left after blatantly transphobic views were expressed at an online members' meeting and after being shut down at the meeting while trying to say why allowing such bigotry is harmful and wrong. The AnarCom Network kept quiet about all this and remained on friendly terms with the ACG. Only very roughly explaining what happened on their website, after being forced to after being accused of transphobia themselves.
There are real problems with such formal organisation, such as a ruling clique (influence of the platform?) and class identitarianism. Aswell as a real lack of young people in such organisations. These organisations are not really anarchist anyway (more like council communists or something) and don't really do much at all that is worthwhile or effective. They are really little more than cults, with those in control of the org (who are usually the founders) and those who just go along with it and blindly follow (this is also true of the AnarCom Network, which my friend was also a member of after leaving the ACG). Being in these orgs has opened their eyes as to what they are and completely put them off the formal 'anarchist' scene.
If you ask me we don't need these organisations (not that they really seem to be achieving anything anyway). What we need is informal anarchist organisation with genuine decentralisation where those involved actually have a real say and real participation - such as affinity groups, which have many good anarchist qualities. And neither do we need all the other problems of such formal organisations, such as dogma (thinking they have 'the one true way of anarchism' and totally dismissing all other types of anarchism) and tolerance of and indifference to bigotry etc.
In my view anarchism should be treated as a philosphical toolbox and not a rigid ideology. Nobody has all the answers and nothing is infallible and theres things that different schools of thought have to offer, even if we don't agree with it all (with the exception of ancapism ofcourse, which is a load of bollocks and not actually anarchist anyway).
theanarchistlibrary.org
A bit later on a couple of other ACG members left after blatantly transphobic views were expressed at an online members' meeting and after being shut down at the meeting while trying to say why allowing such bigotry is harmful and wrong. The AnarCom Network kept quiet about all this and remained on friendly terms with the ACG. Only very roughly explaining what happened on their website, after being forced to after being accused of transphobia themselves.
There are real problems with such formal organisation, such as a ruling clique (influence of the platform?) and class identitarianism. Aswell as a real lack of young people in such organisations. These organisations are not really anarchist anyway (more like council communists or something) and don't really do much at all that is worthwhile or effective. They are really little more than cults, with those in control of the org (who are usually the founders) and those who just go along with it and blindly follow (this is also true of the AnarCom Network, which my friend was also a member of after leaving the ACG). Being in these orgs has opened their eyes as to what they are and completely put them off the formal 'anarchist' scene.
If you ask me we don't need these organisations (not that they really seem to be achieving anything anyway). What we need is informal anarchist organisation with genuine decentralisation where those involved actually have a real say and real participation - such as affinity groups, which have many good anarchist qualities. And neither do we need all the other problems of such formal organisations, such as dogma (thinking they have 'the one true way of anarchism' and totally dismissing all other types of anarchism) and tolerance of and indifference to bigotry etc.
In my view anarchism should be treated as a philosphical toolbox and not a rigid ideology. Nobody has all the answers and nothing is infallible and theres things that different schools of thought have to offer, even if we don't agree with it all (with the exception of ancapism ofcourse, which is a load of bollocks and not actually anarchist anyway).
Affinity Groups
CrimethInc Affinity Groups The Essential Building Block of Anarchist Organization 2017/02/06
theanarchistlibrary.org
Last edited:
danny la rouge
More like *fanny* la rouge!
Did “your friend” explain “class identarianism”? Is that a way of rejecting class analysis?
JimW
支那暗杀团
There's nothing to stop you building those affinity groups. Others have chosen more formal organisations to avoid as best they can all the time wasters that you will attract.I know someone who used to be a dedicated member of the ACG. They told me that the ACG has a transphobia problem. They explained it to me. A couple of members started posting blatantly transphobic stuff on the internal forums and stuff in defense of and in praise of Helen Steel. Some other members expressed concern about it and wanted something to be done. But absolutely nothing was done about it. This led to some people leaving (who later on founded the AnarCom Network). A bit later on a couple of other ACG members left after blatantly transphobic views were expressed at an online members' meeting and after being shut down at the meeting while trying to say why allowing such bigotry is harmful and wrong. The AnarCom Network kept quiet about all this and remained on friendly terms with the ACG. Only very roughly explaining what happened on their website, after being forced to after being accused of transphobia themselves.
There are real problems with such formal organisation, such as a ruling clique (influence of the platform?) and class identitarianism. Aswell as a real lack of young people in such organisations. These organisations are not really anarchist anyway (more like council communists or something) and don't really do much at all that is worthwhile or effective. They are really little more than cults, with those in control of the org (who are usually the founders) and those who just go along with it and blindly follow (this is also true of the AnarCom Network, which my friend was also a member of after leaving the ACG). Being in these orgs has opened their eyes as to what they are and completely put them off the formal 'anarchist' scene.
If you ask me we don't need these organisations (not that they really seem to be achieving anything anyway). What we need is informal anarchist organisation with genuine decentralisation where those involved actually have a real say and real participation - such as affinity groups, which have many good anarchist qualities. And neither do we need all the other problems of such formal organisations, such as dogma (thinking we have 'the one true way of anarchism' and totally dismissing all other types of anarchism) and tolerance of and indifference to bigotry etc.
In my view anarchism should be treated as a philosphical toolbox and not a rigid ideology. Nobody has all the answers and nothing is infallible and theres things that different schools of thought have to offer, even if we don't agree with it all (with the exception of ancapism ofcourse, which is a load of bollocks and not actually anarchist anyway).
Affinity Groups
CrimethInc Affinity Groups The Essential Building Block of Anarchist Organization 2017/02/06
Similar threads
