You must log in or register to comment.

ruin wrote

So as anarchists we should be worried about centrist repression scaring off liberals that were supporting “us” in the streets and need to reevaluate the new “battlefield” in this “civil war”?

I miss the 90s-early 2000s crimethinc. Also, referring to the maga protest crowd yesterday as an insurrection is an insult to actual insurrectionists. Same for most of the black pajama protest crowd to be fair, but I don’t want to say all.


lastfutures OP wrote (edited )

I don't think anarchists are really crimethinc's target audience anymore.


ruin wrote

Maybe they should start reading some of their old output circa 1997 and recognize that their current “politics are boring as fuck”...

The truth is, your politics are boring to them because they really are irrelevant. They know that your antiquated styles of protest — your marches, hand held signs, and gatherings — are now powerless to effect real change because they have become such a predictable part of the status quo. They know that your post-Marxist jargon is off-putting because it really is a language of mere academic dispute, not a weapon capable of undermining systems of control. They know that your infighting, your splinter groups and endless quarrels over ephemeral theories can never effect any real change in the world they experience from day to day. They know that no matter who is in office, what laws are on the books, what “ism”s the intellectuals march under, the content of their lives will remain the same. They — we — know that our boredom is proof that these “politics” are not the key to any real transformation of life. For our lives are boring enough already!

Your Politics Are Boring As Fuck


cyberrose wrote

So whats your way of dealing with fascism in the states now?

I really don't think romantic anarchism will lead anywhere when the other side "starts" to organize. Maybe crimethinc just realized that.


ruin wrote

Firstly, I’d quit calling it fascism. The term has been turned into a useless epithet and is now a cheap stand in for “evil” or “bad guys”. We should probably also throw antifa, neoliberal, right, left on that pile sooner rather than later.

As to what action to take, I personally try to address any authority as it’s encountered in everyday life to the best of my current abilities. When I can work with others to do this in my area I’m happy to participate.

In my estimation your logic on strategy/tactics a bit backwards. The crimethinc line that mass movement revolutionary politicized anarchism presents a real threat to the current system is the definition of romantic. It’s pageantry for the counter culture.

The individualist, on the other hand, has been disabused of any idealized notion of a (utopian) future and engages in daily forms of resistance looking for immediate and practical gains for themselves and those around them.

If you are into actual insurrection , rather than protest, I’d highly recommend checking out The Masters Tools and Toward an Army of Ghosts by Tom Nomad. The first breaks down the nature of policing and how to effectively engage and the second is more a practical philosophical background. I really enjoyed both and you can get them from LBC and I think Cory did both on the Immediatism podcast, though the second is super dense and was challenging in audio form.


cyberrose wrote

Why not calling it what it is? Sure over use of terms does not bring benefits but these people will definitely fit in one or another fascism definition. It's not about "evil" or "bad guys". And knowing what it is also shows what danger lies in it and gives you tools to act.

Your strategy seems to be aimed in not letting such movement rise. And thats really important. But after fascism appears and shows publicly there has also to be direct action against it before it's too late. This means you + the people around you won't be enough. Which does not mean you need a mass movement. There are other organizational tactics more fitting for this kind of work. So what I'm trying to say: Maybe my logic is a bit backwards (but I don't think so since the points you mentioned are also fundamental) or I just see different layers of escalation calling for different responses.

I just wanted to point out that organization, not for mass movement but for establishing vivid resilient connections, is needed for being able to defend you and your surrounding if shit hits the fan... I mean not being prepared broke revolutionaries (anarchists and communists) not just once the neck.

Also will look into the books you mentioned... And sorry if I'm hard to read; it's not my mother tongue.


ruin wrote (edited )

To call it what it “is” would mean actually defining it in useful terms. Ask a dozen leftists what fascist means and you’ll get a dozen vague answers.

This wouldn’t be that big of an issue if not for the fact that being anti fascist has become such a prevalent ideological identifier. To build a platform on the opposition to an ill defined enemy is building a foundation on shifting sands.

I don’t think your entire logic is backwards. I just disagree about your appraisal of what is romantic. Social revolutionary movements are the pinnacle of idealism. Individualist anarchists and most insurrectionists are realists, if not pessimists.

Regardless of the size and power of our enemy, we only have ourselves to bring to the fight. If we viewed our current world as a city ruled by the “fascists” and capitalists we oppose, we would be weeds growing up through a crack in a random sidewalk. We’re not going to infiltrate the 50th floor corner office and topple the regime, but we can spread and multiply. We can find our way into sunlight and take over empty lots and the shells of abandoned factories. Maybe that’s all we’ll ever get. Regardless, we make it our own and keep attacking the concrete we despise whenever the mood strikes and the opportunity presents itself.

I was able to understand you just fine. Your English is great.


Tequila_Wolf wrote

Yeah, I like to read CrimethInc to be able to articulate basic anarchic stuff to non-anarchists in terms of current events.

They also sometimes do do work that has predictive power, which is really the main thing I look for when reading political stuff.


dysco wrote

Like Pittsburg antifascists wrote, antifascists need the moderates, liberals, and progressives in the streets. There were just too many Proud Boys.

One mistake we must not make is to assume that all the pieces are already on the playing board. This is not true—there are still massive sectors of society that have not yet cast their lot with one side or the other.


lastfutures OP wrote

Yea I'm not really into this grand chess game they think they are playing.