Anonymous and collective action

[sabotabby]

jhfurnish makes a fine point about the Anonymous vs. Scientology story. First, watch this if you haven't seen it already:

[Error: unknown template 'video']

He points out that most people have never participated in a protest in their lives, and this could be training for other sorts of mass protest. I've ranted a lot about stupid demonstrations in the past—how there are seldom goals or any sort of cohesive message, how we tolerate the flakes amidst us, and how we view street demos and rallies as an end—expecting those in power to be somehow moved by our anger—rather than as a means of organizing.

Anonymous, many of whom probably have very bad politics judging from my limited visits to /b/, are actually showing us hardened lefties up. They have a goal, they have a message, and they seem to view the February 10th action as part of a process. They are aware of the unique advantages and drawbacks of the technological means available to them (unlike those of us who just use Facebook or e-mail, exposing our real names, identities, and plans to the state and various corporations).

I'd like to see mass demonstrations start to take on a distinctly modern character. Here in North America at least, we use the 60s anti-war protests as a model. It's easy to forget that there were countless groups organizing behind the scenes back then and engaging in actual direct action. Broad social change did not happen because people painted peace signs on their faces, smoked weed, and handed flowers to cops. And yet we still see activists today mimicking the form of these old demonstrations, paying lip service to direct action (which seems to mean anything from smashing a window to handing out pamphlets) and using technology in a rather archaic manner.

So yes. We should be watching closely on the 10th. (I don't think anything is happening in Toronto, which is a pity.) I'll be interested to see what the demonstrations look like—how many actual, physical, bodies Anonymous gathers, how the crowds act, and what they do afterwards. I could be out to lunch, but we might learn a few things from these guys.

Comments

[marnanel.livejournal.com]

this could be training for other sorts of mass protest

Do you mean that /b/ could deliberately be doing this to train for other RL actions? Or that it might give ideas on how to organise to non-/b/ people on how to protest similarly? Or both?

(I know what you mean about the politics of /b/tards, but why is it that there's only /b/ for Anonymous-type things, anyway? You'd have thought that it would have spawned a dozen different such sites each catering for a different political outlook.)

[sabotabby]

Do you mean that /b/ could deliberately be doing this to train for other RL actions? Or that it might give ideas on how to organise to non-/b/ people on how to protest similarly? Or both?

More the latter than the former. I think /b/'s goals are limited (which is a good thing; we don't want a world run by /b/tards). But they're bridging the gap between internet organization and RL organization, and that's something that we can all learn from.

I think we're just seeing the beginnings of where networking technology can go. Part of this is because many people in the left aren't actually techies. There's the old guard that mistrusts the internet, and even most of the younger generation isn't comfortable enough with technology to get creative with it. That can change very rapidly, of course.

[marnanel.livejournal.com]

I had wondered in the past whether it was just that any such site would become overrun by /b/tards anyway and turn into an outpost of 4chan. (Or even if it wasn't /b/ as such, persons with reactionary politics do tend to hang out on comment boards in my experience and I wondered whether it would necessarily either just turn into another freeper dive or a debate site, rather than as any kind of constructive discussion.

[sabotabby]

That blog is a work of beauty.

[marnanel.livejournal.com]

unique advantages and drawbacks of the technological means available to them (unlike those of us who just use Facebook or e-mail, exposing our real names, identities, and plans to the state and various corporations).

oh, do you remember when the FBI were threatening the guy who runs infoshop.org and it turned out he had never considered that turning off access logging in Apache would be a pretty neat idea?

[sabotabby]

No, but arrgh. Why am I not surprised?

[threeliesforone.livejournal.com]

I actually heard about this on perezhilton.com first, interestingly enough.

[sabotabby]

Isn't that the blog that keeps insisting that Fidel is dead?

[threeliesforone.livejournal.com]

Yes! Yes it is!

[secretsoflife.livejournal.com]

stuff is /definitely/ going down in toronto. there will be many anons out in Guy Fawkes masks :)

http://hatemachine.biz/toronto/index.php?title=Main_Page

(omg that url pains me).

[sabotabby]

STUDENTS, TALK TO YOUR PROFESSORS, THEY HAVE BEEN PROTESTING SHIT SINCE THE 60s, THEY KNOW WHAT TO DO

Hahahahaha.

[secretsoflife.livejournal.com]

haha yeah that broke me too.

also the fact that about.com has a page on "how to lose a tail", hehe.

[gillen.livejournal.com]

Toronto has an action planned. Hell, Kitchner has one. You can download the "Toronto Raid Package" here.

[sabotabby]

Well, Kitchener is actually a hotbed of political activism for some reason. I am glad to know that something is going down in Toronto, considering how large and assholeish the Co$ headquarters here is.

[esizzle.livejournal.com]

there are some rules there that are pretty good for anyone to follow. Especially the one about preparing signs that keep the message are focused and relevant. I still remember how confusing it was to run into the anti-war protest last year, I had no clue what was going on till you actually told me later. And that woman whose feelings were hurt because I didn't want to buy her newsletter about some poor american on death row and she questioned what I was doing standing around there in the first place! oh dear. we really need better leaders (and organisers) i think.

[jhfurnish.livejournal.com]

Well, the point I think Anonymous is making is that we need _all_ of our Fellow Workers to be more truly, intelligently _autonomous_ so that leadership as such is not an issue anymore.

Organizers, yes. Leaders, no, that is archaic now and to come to the point: the Black civil rights movement seemed to get really mired down once MLK2 and Malcolm X were killed and replaced by the Man's servants, plus of course COINTELPRO. The Black community has had a hard-as-hell time coming up with anyone of that caliber since, especially due to COINTELPRO.

It's the same for all of us: everyone needs to be autonomous and self-educating enough that leadership, as such, is completely unnecessary.

[esizzle.livejournal.com]

Well I guess it depends what you mean by leaders and leadership. For me a leader is someone who has a vision and is able to teach it to others. It's not someone who sets and maps out how to do something - that's a manager, or "organiser" if you prefer.

In that sense, leadership is always necessary. Nothing gets accomplished if there is no vision, and any vision needs people who are able to communicate it so that it can become a common vision. The video we watched would not have happened if it wasn't for a couple of people who realised it would be a good idea that others will get behind.

[marnanel.livejournal.com]

If "leader" means someone who organises, we're always going to need leaders (but perhaps they can be any of us or all of us at different times). If "leader" means someone inspiring, someone with a vision, we're always going to need leaders, but they need to be all of us.

[sabotabby]

I must be getting old and cynical, but I don't think that "we're all leaders" works well in practice. Not in this milieu, anyway. I like the Zapatista concept of "leading by obeying."

As it stands now, the problem is more a lack of accountability and transparency and less a problem of authoritarianism.

[marnanel.livejournal.com]

It's cynicism that makes the world go round, or something like that. I think I need to read more about the Zapatista concept though.

"The problem" on the left etc? not in society in general?

[sabotabby]

The problem on the left, not in general. In general, we have authoritarian, unaccountable, and opaque governing structures. On the left, we are terrified of authoritarianism—rightly so, but to the degree that people seem to get it confused with organization and responsibility.

[marnanel.livejournal.com]

Oh, okay, sure, right. In that case I couldn't agree more; not only does it make actually doing anything useful almost impossible, it gives people licence to say, "See, I knew what you really stood for was chaos, and how are you people planning to run society if you can't organise a pissup in a brewery, etc etc, cont'd page 94."

[jhfurnish.livejournal.com]

I'm flattered that you find my insight in this case strong, Sabtab. I often wonder if I offer anything to the Left at all. I suppose I must finally be learning.

I'm finally killing the Amerikan inside myself and becoming human.

It's like some damned iron coccoon and I'm trying to hatch myself out. At least, back in 1995, there was a Wobbly handy to take the first several whacks at this thing from the outside. I am forever grateful for that.

[sabotabby]

Oh, hell. There are days when I want to make peace with the institutions and hierarchies that govern all of our lives. It's always a process.

[jhfurnish.livejournal.com]

Well, in any case, I'm going to be there. I need to get back into the game in a bigger way.

[seaya.livejournal.com]

I couldn't get past the horrible voice. What is this all about?

As I understand it

[sabotabby]

Did you see that bizarre Tom Cruise video where he says that only Scientologists can help car crash victims and then laughs maniacally? Basically, it was all over YouTube. The Church of Scientology went apeshit and threatened to sue if the video wasn't taken down. YouTube took it down, but 4chan decided to retaliate by launching an online campaign against Co$. They hacked a bunch of Scientology sites and now they've started with actual protests.

I'm finding the whole thing terribly funny, but I also think that their videos are quite effective and sophisticated bits of propaganda. This one is a bunch of rules for the upcoming worldwide protest, and they'd really be good rules for any large demo.

Re: As I understand it

[marnanel.livejournal.com]

I'm thinking "who would win in a battle between Co$ and /b/" may just be the real-life version of those "who would win in a battle between Chuck Norris and Cthulhu" arguments.

Re: As I understand it

[sabotabby]

But who is Cthulhu and who is Chuck Norris?

I mean, obviously Cthulhu would devour Chuck Norris. Slowly. The power of Chuck Norris' puny faith and Huckabee endorsements does not hold a candle to the force of terror that is the Old Ones.

Whereas I think that the Co$ has the upper hand in terms of raw strength and economic might. But I'm rooting for /b/.

Re: As I understand it

[faithhopetricks.livejournal.com]

....now I'm picturing Hubbard as Cthulhu. EW.

[auralarua.livejournal.com]

It sounds like GLaDOS. :D

http://youtube.com/watch?v=if3Qv2tHyfA

STILL ALIVE

[seanmonster.livejournal.com]

I thought so too.

Chairman Meow

[rohmie.livejournal.com]

I see an icon you want to steal request.

Re: Chairman Meow

[sabotabby]

Oh, there's more where that came from.

I need to figure out which of my icons to delete in exchange.

Re: Chairman Meow

[rohmie.livejournal.com]

It puts my "TWO LEGS GOOD, FOUR LEGS BAD" magnet to shame.

Re: Chairman Meow

[sabotabby]

Oh, come now. That's an awesome magnet.

Re: Chairman Meow

[rohmie.livejournal.com]

Good concept and execution but it didn't require me to actually draw anything. After all, I did it in Word. The only really personal touch was weathering it.

[erinlin.livejournal.com]

Massive protests on my birthday? Awesome.

[sabotabby]

All I get for my birthday is the Montréal Anarchist Bookfair. Which means I usually can't go.

[(Anonymous)]

[sabotabby]

Y HALO THAR ANONYMOUS

[rrrao.livejournal.com]

Wow. Anonymous, Project Chanology, 4chan, /b/tards... I've just absorbed a whole world I never even knew existed a few hours ago. I'm with you, this will be interesting to watch unfold, and what lessons/tactics/etc. can be learned and/or disseminated into the 'Left'.

This has a faint whiff of 'flash mob' too, though, which got everyone excited for a year or two a while ago (2003-ish?), but seemed to stay in the realm of situ/surrealist kind of antics, and refused to lend itself to making more explicitly 'political' points.

[sabotabby]

It does remind me of the flash mob. Not having a cell, though, I was left out of the loop back then.

[(Anonymous)]

it seems to me that you are well read and think critically, so i have a question for you that i need to preface with some background info. through friends, i know many white anarchists who are involved with activist organizations and talk about putting power and resources back into the hands of people. i do think authoritarianism and hierarchical structures are fucked up, but i am suspicious of the idea of putting power into the hands of people, unless there's significant critical work and dialogue about racial, gender and other power dynamics.

i feel uppity for not trusting 'the people' as well as some anarchists who can talk a lot about class and neocolonialism out there, on a global scale, but when it comes to gender race sexuality, these things are just secondary, revolving around class and global capitalism, and don't affect their personal lives and their relations to people around them and absent from their social circles. i too am biased because gender race / citizenship and sexuality have affected my life and i pay attention to and read about these things more. plus, i have very little 'activism' experience, and i'd rather read theory and volunteer/work in social services than march on the streets, feeling useless and aggravated. i'm still wrapping my head around class because this is not an easy thing for me to understand, as i seem to be straddling different positions of class power, across places and time. i wish there was more queer(y)ing of class, but i'm unsatisfied with analysis of class that i've heard and read as i find them too simple.

my question for you: i really don't want to be turned off from anarchism in general just because i find some anarchists incredibly frustrating to work with, for this reason, as well as their romanticizing of indigenous philosophy (as if it's homogenous) and rural communal living. any books/people/events that might help me in learning about anarchist organizing that takes into account these power dynamics?

p.s. what exactly is direct action?

[sabotabby]

Hello there! (Wow, this is an old post.)

First off, don't take anything I say as representative of anarchism. While I've identified as an anarchist in the past, I don't especially identify as one now (partially because of the sorts of issues you bring up). I got frustrated with working in anarchist groups because they tend to still be hierarchical and authoritarian but because anarchists tend to reject hierarchy and authority categorically, these structures are invisible and taboo to talk about. Also, as you mention, most anarchists are straight white boys and truly don't understand the impact of their actions on marginalized communities.

In terms of theory and literature, I was having a vent session about this with some anarchist friends of mine the other night. We agreed that the only area of anarchist theory where significant theoretical analysis is taking place is anarcho-primitivism/anti-civilization—and none of us agree with that. There's no Kropotkin or Bakunin making breakthroughs theoretically or talking about how we can make the modern world free, egalitarian, and sustainable. This has been another major source of my alienation from the anarchist movement.

This probably sounds unduly negative, because there are a lot of anarchists and a few anarchist groups that I respect. Most of them work with community, anti-poverty, labour, and immigrant rights groups, which is essentially what I do.

Direct action is essentially the opposite of electoral and symbolic politics. (Electoral politics are obvious; symbolic politics are things like demos or vigils, where you're making A Statement and indirectly asking someone else, usually a government, to act on your behalf.) Direct action is all about empowering those directly affected by an issue.

The classic example is a strike, but it can also include everything from community soup kitchens to squats to political assassination. That's another one of my gripes with the anarchist movement—everyone agrees that "direct action" is the way to effect change, but few actually understand which sorts of direct actions are effective. An action isn't useful or desirable just because it's direct! There's also an endemic misunderstanding as to what constitutes direct action—for example, throwing a brick through a Starbucks window, while it feels very direct, is actually symbolic.

Don't know if this adequately answers your questions, so I'm happy to clarify anything!

[(Anonymous)]

i like that definition of direct action because (i assume) this involves not only politics of solidarity but also of responsibility. solidarity is oh so romanticized and everyone seems to want to be my white ally these days! but no one really wants to take responsibility, and i guess having no formal hierarchy in organizations helps elude responsibility and accountability for the actions you and the group take.

by the way, the Opirg at my school recently invited derrick jensen to talk about the end of western civilization and using violence in order to transform society into ultimately an agrarian commune. some of the opirg members are associated with the nearby anarchist bookshop/collective who are thinking about getting john zerzan to speak. gah.

i don't know who kropotkin or bakunin are, so i don't know what you're referring to, but your response about direct action was helpful and i am glad that there are anarchists that are involved in that work. i thought they only liked to have demos and break stuff - kidding! though there is a song that goes "anarchy means i litter".

[sabotabby]

Well, yes. Solidarity—and really any sort of politics—has to begin with responsibility. If I throw a brick through a window in the middle of a demo, there are probably not going to be many consequences for me. If I throw a brick through a window and there happens to be a non-status immigrant walking by, there could be life-and-death consequences for that person. (And I've seen that happen at demos, more or less.)

And the anti-civ people piss me off because their utopia involves a measure of genocide. At least Stalinists are honest and somewhat less ruthless in terms of scale! Jensen seems to believe that 6 billion people will die off no matter what we do, and Zerzan seems to want to speed up the process. No thanks.

Kropotkin's fun to read, especially Mutual Aid, which lays the smackdown to Social Darwinism. He was a Russian scientist and anarchist, and an actual prince who gave up his royal title, which is just funny. He was on the wrong side of the Russian Revolution, but Lenin forgave him for it and gave him a state burial.

though there is a song that goes "anarchy means i litter"

I obviously need to download it, because hee!