celebratedrecluse

3

celebratedrecluse wrote

if ya get the right yacht, it's going to have private security or something guarding it i bet.

i would be shocked if a billionaire put their assets on an unguarded maritime vessel, but i guess the ruling class has made even more inexplicable choices than that before...still, be careful yall...lol

4

celebratedrecluse wrote

draw circles and let others draw the A, vice versa, in street art seems the closest analog. this happens sometimes but usually the artist just draws it all themself.

These days, the proliferation of DIY & small artist produced stickers allows people to signal themselves pretty complexly, but it's fundamentally a more individualistic/monologue means of communication than just drawing on a wall.

Frankly, I think it is better to collectivize around shared common spaces & projects, than to focus on individualistic graffiti efforts like the Ichthys. Unless you live in a place where anarchism has a death penalty or some serious punishment, exercise your limited freedom to associate with others!

Reply to comment by /u/selver in Friday Free Talk by /u/ThreadBot

2

celebratedrecluse wrote

That's true, but it sounds like you have already thought of a way to turn half of the workers against your bosses, even if you didn't realize it.

To clarify: perhaps you can seed the impression among some of the workers that the bosses are failing their "workplace mission" through incompetency. Once there is substantial conflict between middle management & the lower-ranked workers over this, it may be possible to generalize this resentment beyond the initial issue.

Of course, if you work in a high-turnover environment, this is exponentially more difficult. As an "evolutionary" mechanism, I find often that your sort of workplace (high worker loyalty to the mission of the company) is usually correlated with astronomical rates of turnover); although, there are exceptions to every generalization, and I do not know your particular situation.

Alternatively, another tack you can take is to discuss non-work related stuff with your co-workers, and build bonds of mutual solidarity on those bases. For example, find out what their hobbies are, their favorite hangouts, the media they like, the neighborhoods they live in. Get them to open up to you. When they do, they will also likely disclose problems of structural oppression they face: their landlord's rent, their abusive partner, maybe even the private concerns they hold about the workplace. But it's all about building trust, ultimately. If you can form a connection outside work, then you've won arguably the hardest battle of the entire unionization process.

6

celebratedrecluse wrote

it is strategically necessary to liberate our collective projects from as many connections to "the grid", leviathan as you call it. Being attached to "the grid" is a huge tactical and strategic liability: for example, relying on industrially-sold food rather than having access to a comrade-run collective farm is going to drain labor-time (and thus resources) from radical communities, when the food needs could be at least supplemented for free/lower cost.

In order to liberate ourselves from the grid, we are going to need to 1. think logistically, what are our community needs (as opposed to consumerist desires, like what is actually necessary) & how can we realistically fulfill them, and 2. confederate existing projects into rhizomatic networks. Right now, there are a lot of projects (in certain areas of the world), but they do not communicate or coordinate nearly well enough to achieve their goals as best as possible.

5

celebratedrecluse wrote (edited )

  1. Every mass extinction has resulted in new, frankly more beautiful forms of life. For example, the Creataceous extinction resulted in the ascension of mammals, many of whom have developed much larger brain-to-body ratios, the development of more complex forms of social communication, allowing for an incredible array of diversity. Now that the era of mammals may be coming to an end, it is better to celebrate the coming of a new world, than to despair in our era's decline.

1a. In doing so, we will be able to sustain much greater levels of political activity, relishing joy and positive vision, in the face of mass death, which is exactly what must happen if we are to exert our collective and individual wills in this critical historical moment. Which leads me to my next point:

  1. The ongoing collapse of agro-industrial society will offer unprecedented opportunities for restructuring social relationships. While we are facing the multiplication of terrible tragedies, both to human and non-human forms of life, the institutions which are responsible for those tragedies are at least as precariously positioned as those it renders disposable. It is irresponsible to engage in pessimism, in the same way that trans-pessimism or afro-pessimism is often utilized by liberals of marginalized identities (respectively) to justify inaction, a retreat inwards to the domain of philosophy. What we need now, to the contrary, is an advance outwards toward each other, and the pessimist discourse (as understandable as it is) does nothing to achieve that. For a more in-depth, engaging critique of this, here is a podcast which I found instructive.

  2. The current mode of production (which is, essentially, a mode of destruction when externalities are factored in) is already passing away. What I mean by this is twofold. First, that the current modes for extracting energy & resources, as well as the patterns of consumption for, are destroying themselves as part of this collapse process. Certainly not fast enough, which is the problem...however, the Second meaning is that there are alternative modes of being which are replacing the current oligopolistic options for sustaining ourselves and meeting our basic needs. Increasingly we have the technologies (solar, wind, bioengineering, tiny homes, etc) within our grasp politically (due to falling costs, reproducibility, etc) to enact different cultural ontologies (permaculture, post-consumerist sociality, back-to-the-land ethics, etc). In parallel with the historic rise in popularity of radical politics, with proportionate exceptionality being characteristic of anarchist philosophies, this historical moment offers incredible potential for building what I think of as parallel-figurative societies: in a phrase used often in our milieu, "dual power".

  3. Falling into the cliche of "natural vs. artificial" which many interested in the collapse reify (out of an understandable desire for narrative convenience & clarity), lets humanity off the hook for actually engaging in action to shift the ecological terrain. "Natural" does not mean good, and humans can, will, and I argue should transform the earth to account for the destruction which we have inherited. Whether that means changing the composition of the atmosphere to counteract greenhouse effects, engineering bacteria & archaea to consume the horribly toxic plastic waste we have created, or editing our genomes of ourselves and other life forms to better tolerate changing climatic conditions, we should consider all these options open to us.

4a. As a trans person who finds great potential praxis in deep green positionalities, I find the biological essentialism of "Nature" that is pretty prominent in many primitivist/deep green/etc spaces & discourses to be deeply off the mark. Life has always changed itself, and now humans have the unprecedented opportunity to engage in that process self-consciously. We should not retreat into reactionary essentialism, certainly not now the planet happens to be going through a major crisis. But hey, don't take it from me. If you reject what my arguments are, that's fine, you're entitled to it. However, if you start to notice that your movements are filling up, or have been filled, with reactionary fascist types, you may want to re-examine your own discourse for why you have been attracting these thanatic cult members.

  1. In thinking about the collapse, we should imagine ourselves not as a "dead end", nor imagine the collapse as a single or unprecedented event. In fact, there have been 20 mass extinctions in the history of multicellular life, and there will certainly be more. While rarely before have extinctions progressed so rapidly, never before has there been a form of life as culturally intelligent and technologically self-aware as humanity. It would be premature to judge our species as unable to engineer or hack its way into a new social niche of our own innovation-- one of anarchist/communist, rather than capitalist, bases. Insofar as I am able, I would rather not focus on the death of everything as an overwhelming determination of reality. Instead, I would like to help shoulder the collective burden of transforming our social relationships in a way that offers actual opportunities for praxis.

Others can criticize the "denizens of technology", the foolish leftists who continue to struggle for social change...but I prefer to focus on the ways we can actually engage with this historical moment, and form new beautiful connections with each other & the animals/plants/rhizomes that surround us.

It's not easy, but it is what revolution is. And frankly, I'll die saying it's a better way to live.

5

celebratedrecluse wrote (edited )

  • Insist on doing everything through "channels." Never permit short-cuts to be taken in order to expedite decisions.
  • Make "speeches." Talk as frequently as possible and at great length. Illustrate your "points" by long anecdotes and accounts of personal experiences.
  • When possible, refer all matters to committees, for "further study and consideration." Attempt to make the committee as large as possible — never less than five.
  • Bring up irrelevant issues as frequently as possible.
  • Haggle over precise wordings of communications, minutes, resolutions.
  • Refer back to matters decided upon at the last meeting and attempt to re-open the question of the advisability of that decision.
  • Insist on perfect work in relatively unimportant products; send back for refinishing those which have the least flaw.
  • Hold conferences when there is more critical work to be done.
  • Never pass on your skill and experience to a new or less skillful worker.

lmfao this is every anarchist project I've ever been party to

2

celebratedrecluse wrote

No, don't do this. If you aren't using a proxy, then it won't work, and if you are using some way of hiding your IP, it makes that method unusable to other people who just want to use the site more safely-- in addition to also not actually fucking up reddit the way you think it will.

4

celebratedrecluse wrote

Suggestion: We could replace "Anarchists against the wall, for the no-state solution!" with:

In solidarity with Palestinian movements against settler colonialism & for self-determination.

Eventually, we could create a list of essays, media sources, etc that are made by Palestinian radicals/anarchists, but for now I think that phrasing is a good substitute.

3

celebratedrecluse wrote

This is very common across the world, the US is relatively unusual in not generally requiring this, or requiring a sterilization procedure (to my knowledge)

At the end of the day, this is classism (against trans people who want medical surgery as part of their transition, but cannot afford it) & bioessentialist eugenics (against trans people who don't want surgery at all)

However, if we overthrow the regime of the state, then nobody will have a "legal gender"!

problem solved

4

celebratedrecluse wrote

unless the rapist is committed to and able to participate in accountability, consequences, and reparative work, it is statistically unlikely that even a rapist who feels remorse, guilt, and/or a desire to change their behavior will not commit intimate violence again.

Many rapists in fact do not have these opportunities, either due to a lack of social supports for victims to have their perpatrators held accountable, lack of desire by the victim(s) to facilitate or participate in those kind of processes (which is totally valid of course), or even in some cases being enmeshed in a cultural context where they cannot disclose their past without being subject to immediate and far-reaching ostracization. Thus, for any number of reasons even a rapist who wants to change their ways is going to remain a huge fucking liability to any organizing effort, due to the lack of conversation or community projects that are designed to deal with their toxicity.

In fact, to the contrary most rapists are enmeshed in a society which not only excuses, but even valorizes their behavior. This happens not only in dominant society, but also in radical subcultures. So the rape becomes a positive thing, or one that can be invisibilized if inconvenient. In that social context, it is very rare for the rapist to even acknowledge their behavior as negative, or as what it is, let alone have a desire to change themselves and their relationships with others.

Thus, any rapist who has not gone through some kind of effective, victim-centered community process (which is basically all rapists, statistically) has a very good chance of hurting someone again, particularly people they are intimate with. Even people who do go through this process frequently commit violence again. Rapists are a clear and present danger, which necessitates cutting rapists out, which in turn fuels their dangerous toxicity, and in some cases even their desire to commit further violence on populations who they feel "wronged them" by exiling them. And so the cycle of violence continues.

Nonetheless, this is also why it is justifiable to kill rapists. If there is a broad social context that prohibits serious restorative justice work (generally true across the globe, and from what I hear about South Asia it sounds pretty true there too), the rapists are in power. Non violent methods have failed dramatically. If people are going to start striking back, it's assymetrical warfare against a much more powerful target, and deserves the support and solidarity of those who oppose rape culture.