Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments


md_ wrote (edited )

but we aren't going to get far with anything if we only work with people who are 100% pure and unaffected by social prejudices

Um, who said that's the goal? Telling your comrades not to make racist comments is not the same as giving them a purity test before you start working together.

Unless of course you mean that they should never be called out for racist behaviour.

Yeah, that's part of what's wrong with idpol.

Internal evaluation assemblies are not an "idpol" thing. It's where anarchist organisations evaluate their actions, output, and state of the group in the year that ended, and plan for the next year.

Unless you are a hardcore individualist, that's not policing.

Also there are a lot of options besides either tolerating or purging/quitting. Argue with them, challenge them gently, use NVC-style arguments, reason with them, ask them why they think that, make fun of them, retaliate in kind and turn it into a competition. I've used some of these strategies a lot and they're far more effective than zero-tolerance.

But that's what happens - you point out a problem, you take it up to your self as the target of the racist or homophobic comment to explain at length why it was such, and you are beholden to the rest of the group to understand and work towards changing. Honestly, the balance of power is tipped the entire other way than you are making it to look like.

God, either you participate in a really badly functioning organisation (especially if you think making fun of your comrades is a communication strategy), or you are making shit up.

Even assuming that those things in the article and in your comments are real events and not just the perception of normal social interactions by someone who apparently wants to draw swastikas but be welcome in anarchist circles (wtf!?), then you still haven't shown that those are inherent to Identity Politics.


anarchist_critic wrote

but that's what happens

That's maybe what happened ten years ago before idpol took root. These days it's instant accusation, "I don't have to tell you why it's racist because muh experience muh privilege", humiliating displays of apologetics or else you're out.

and you are beholden to the rest of the group to understand and work towards changing

Only if they convince you that it actually is racist (or whatever). Submitting to other people's perceptions has never been part of anarchism.

especially if you think making fun of your comrades is a communication strategy

Hell, you must live a really boring straight-laced life. Humour is often effective in taking the sting out of potentially hurtful situations. Most people are put on the defensive a lot less by someone showing through humour that what they just said is silly or inconsistent with their beliefs than by being confronted about it. Anyway part of being a close friend is being able to take the piss out of each other and not get offended.

someone who apparently wants to draw swastikas but be welcome in anarchist circles (wtf!?)

I haven't seen the artwork in question, but I can list a large number of cases where drawing a swastika is anarchist:

  1. you're drawing artwork of a clash between fascists and antifa and you put swastikas on the fascists
  2. you're drawing parodies of fascists
  3. you're drawing serious artwork about historical fascism
  4. you're drawing anti-police graphics and you put swastikas on the badges or riot shields
  5. you're attacking capitalism so you draw a swastika composed of corporate logos
  6. you're drawing a futuristic sci-fi dystopia with fascist features
  7. you're drawing a world where all political groups have their own communities, there's a fascist group and they have a swastika
  8. you're drawing artwork about ahimsa or Iranian culture or native Panamanians who use non-Nazi swastikas
  9. you're making abstract images free association style, drawing random images and one of them comes out as a swastika
  10. you're making a collage of all the most offensive images you can find

I don't see why any of these would mean you're a Nazi or a Nazi sympathiser or any less anarchist than anyone else.

Hell, even if you're drawing a crossed-out swastika or a swastika being smashed, you're gonna have to draw a swastika.

If anyone who draws a swastika is a Nazi then anyone who draws a circle-A is an anarchist and this means every company which has put a circle-A on one of their edgy products is anarchist. It also means that anyone who wears a headdress or a mohican is Native American. That's how ridiculous your argument is.