Ganggang wrote (edited )

I didn’t know about this before I read the article. But reading it, the (primary?) charge of gentrification doesn’t really seem accurate, I really don’t think a bunch of “dreadlocks wearing white punks” are going to make the property value go up.

The thing about the inappropriate joke workshop is gross, as is some of the comments said by attendees.

But still yeah I mean I wish they hadn’t done that. I’m also concerned about racism in the anarchist community but I don’t think that kicking out crime thinc is really going to help. It’s also not like all APOC support this, it’s just the ones that gathered together to accomplish the “eviction”. There were like 8 of them.

I’d maybe speculate even though they didn’t directly say this that their opinion is that anarchism is a “movement” that should be BIPOC led, and that crime thinc isn’t facilitating this. The part they objected to about crime thinc encouraging people to reject society suggests this to me in particular, they seem to feel that’s basically lifestylism. Personally I don’t think anarchism should have any leaders and therefore isn’t really a movement either. So I disagree with the people that stopped this event.


Ganggang wrote (edited )

In practice it’s mainly used as an insult (often against individualist anarchists, which I am), implying the person being insulted is a larper or whatever. I guess really what they’re saying is that we’re more focused on our own lives rather than a commitment to “the movement”. They’d say this makes us “not real anarchists”, as a true anarchist would have a deep commitment to the movement.

I’d say “the movement” is just another form of social control. I want to liberate myself. My care for others, and my belief that empowering others will help me become more free, make me want to help but that’s still ultimately for the purpose of self liberation. Also usually helping out non ruling class people is good for me materially, or at least I believe it will be at some point. My “cause” is Not charity, and not a devotion to “the movement”.


Ganggang wrote (edited )

Well in this image it’s banks, McDonald’s and police cars getting burned. I don’t think the image is claiming all destruction is good, just the destruction of that which oppresses us - for instance bourgeoise property (represented by McDonald’s) and capital (likewise by banks).

Even without a plan, I think burning a cop car is inherently beneficial to us because now there’s one less cop car to fit us in. Taking the money from a bank and burning the bank is helpful because it makes the oppressive force of capital scared and it restores our dignity.

It doesn’t benefit the capitalist class to burn a bank even if you have no plan afterwards. There’s a reason that’s illegal. The only plan is to remove the boot so we can do as we like not to structure a revolution for the masses.


Ganggang wrote

Well they wouldn’t be ruins anymore if we built a new society from them. “Infrastructure” can be decentralized, like some people choosing to make a farm for everyone. And also people could probably spread out a lot more since they wouldn’t all have to be crammed into New York City to get a job.


Reply to comment by Ganggang in Site feature request by Ganggang

Ganggang OP wrote

I mean they don’t need to do it, I’m not demanding it. It’s an idea. Maybe if other people want it we can get it done with donation money. I can’t program myself though unfortunately