Free Radical Radio Audiobooks continues with the Individualists Tending Toward The Wild recording series with ITS communiques 5, 6, and 7.
Some interesting nuggets, of which there are many:
- In #5, they take responsibility for a Greenpeace bombing and warn all leftists they’re targets too.
- In #6, they change their stance on things like using the genderless letter ‘x’, and bombing Greenpeace.
- In #7 they reflect on their relationship to anarchism and where they differ, as well as respond to technology apologia.
And since you’re probably too lazy/skeptical to actually click through to the audio or read the text, here are two juicy quotes out of context for you internet slaves to feed off in the comments:
But ITS thinks that authority is not always bad–it is bad when it restricts Freedom, when it limits your capacities to be able to reach your ends. But it is not bad when an authority figure teaches you not to falter, to pick yourself up from some emotional or physical decline, when he gives you wise counsel and when he leads you by good paths.
An example: The tree grows, the rain gives it strength, the moon makes it so there is humidity in the environment and new plants may germinate; the tree drops fruits that in turn are eaten by the herbivorous animals and their young so they grow in a future, these herbivorous animals are hunted by carnivorous and omnivorous (human) animals, the meat is for them and their young, the surplus is devoured by scavenging animals and brought to their young, the earth is nourished with what is finally left. A bird comes to the aforementioned tree and brings what it needs for its nest, while the bird flies, a seed falls where the earth is fertile and everything begins again.
From this idea that everything in Wild Nature has an order, and because we say that we obey this order and these natural laws, those who disobey these natural statutes are confined to obeying the system and denying their human nature.
1:07:16 – Lines In The Sand: Three essays on identity, oppression, and social war – by Peter Gelderloos – MP3 – Read – Print – Archive – Torrent – YouTube
“…I think we all need to fiercely reject the Ally as a primary identity of
struggle. You cannot give solidarity if you are not struggling first
and foremost for your own reasons. To be only or primarily an ally is to
be a parasite on others’ struggles, with no hope greater than to be a
benign parasite; it is to refuse to acknowledge our interests and place
in the world out of a dogmatic insistence on identifying ourselves with
the system we are supposed to be fighting. Being aware of relative
oppression and privilege is vital, but emphasizing those differences
over the fact that all of us have common enemies and all of us have
reasons to destroy the entire system is deliberately missing
opportunities to make ourselves stronger in this fight.”
Lines in Sand is a collection by Peter Gelderloos that looks
critically at identity politics and anti-oppression politics. All of
them are very thought provoking and well worth reading. These aren’t
knee-jerk criticisms, but rather are thoughtful explorations of the
problematic aspects of identity and anti-oppression politics and
“…tokenization and paternalism are on any list of “fucked up” behaviors in
an anti-oppression practice, thus the practice protects itself from
open complicity with the very problems it creates. Human agency is a
fundamental component of freedom, perhaps the most important one;
therefore if someone is denied agency in their own struggle because the
most legit thing they can do is be an ally to someone else’s struggle,
it is inevitable that they will exercise their agency in the course of
supporting a struggle they view as someone else’s. To do so, they will
either look for any oppressed person who supports a form of struggle
they feel inclined towards, and use them as a legitimating façade, or
they will try to participate fully and affect the course of a broader
campaign or coalition in which they are pretending to be mere allies. In
other words, by presenting privilege as a good thing, anti-oppression
politics creates privileged people who have nothing to fight for and
inevitably tokenize or paternalize those whose struggles are deemed
The struggle against the construction of the Trans Adriatic Pipeline
(TAP) through Greece – Albania – Italy
Pamphlet, A5, 48 pages
“They protest against the energy that flows under their house, but inside of the house they want it!” yells the stuffy national-popular bourgeois in the spring of 2017 seeing what’s upsetting a small village in Puglia and spreading out to the rest of Italy. Fights erupted between police and opponents in front of the future construction site of the TAP
(Trans-Adriatic Pipeline), the new gas pipeline which will link up Europe with the endpoint in Turkey of the Trans-Anatolian Natural Gas Pipeline that’s connectect with the gas fields in the Caspian Sea. The new gas pipeline will cross the north of Greece into Albania, where it will continue through the Adriatic Sea to finally reach the shores of
Lecce in Italy, where it will connect with the existing gas transport network.
The TAP project, as most other energy projects, are considered of utmost “strategical” importance by power. A fair enough reason for enemies of power to have a look at the ongoing struggle against this TAP, put together this collection of texts from anarchist comrades active in the conflict and broaden up the horizons as to favour direct intervention
against everything that keeps the energy of power flowing.
You can download the pamphlet here
Issues and articles of Vanguard, an anarchist publication based out of New York during the 1930s.
Posted By Juan Conatz
Episode 13 from podcast.anarchistnews.org
Welcome to the anews podcast. This is episode 13. This podcast covers anarchist activity, ideas, and conversations from the previous week.
Editorial – Training for Dealing with Cops
TOTW – Relationships over Distance
Introduction to Anarchy:
All things being equal, isn’t violence hierarchical?
“…this article aims to critically engage with the dominant ideas and practices of anti-oppression politics. We define anti-oppression politics as a related group of analyses and practices that seeks to address inequalities that materially, psychologically, and socially exist in society through education and personal transformation. While there is value in some aspects of anti-oppression politics, they are not without severe limitations. Anti-oppression politics obfuscates the structural operations of power and promotes a liberal project of inclusion that is necessarily at odds with the struggle to build a collective force capable of fundamentally transforming society. It is our contention that anti-oppression furthers a politics of inclusion as a poor substitute for a politics of revolution. The dominant practices of anti-oppression further an approach to struggle whose logical conclusion is the absorption of those deemed oppressed into the dominant order, but not to the eradication and transformation of the institutional foundations of oppression.”
With Allies Like These: Reflections on Privilege Reductionism – by Common Cause – MP3 – Read – Print – Archive – Torrent – YouTube
Edited for mb3-org.com
Introduction When I moved to Seattle many years after the infamous upheaval of 1999, I found almost no remnants of whatever had existed here. Certainly, I could find other anarchists, but for a long time I found myself in variations of the same conversation: How do we reach each other? What are we doing? Why does nothing happen? And then, finally, I was with other anarchists in the street — friends and acquaintances, but others, too. Who are all these people? We were all in black masks. This was the first black bloc in Seattle in about a decade. Hundreds of posters all over town had announced a demonstration against police violence in the middle of Capitol Hill as part of the West Coast Days of Action Against State Violence April 8–9, 2010. The size of the demonstration was modest — probably around 80 people — but nearly half the crowd came en bloc. Anarchists in the Puget Sound1 had been inspired by recent events elsewhere: the Greek insurrection of December 2008, the riots following the murder of Oscar Grant in 2009 in Oakland, and, most recently, the wild and disruptive demonstrations in Portland.2 These were significant to us for many reasons. Anarchists played an active and critical part in all of them; they showed that people can actively resist the violence of police; they revealed that when people act on their rage, they open a space in defiance of the violence of everyday life. In this space, new social relations come to be as the authority of the state and capital are challenged. These distant fires had stirred the flames in us, and we took the streets that day ready for a fight. But if the mild clashes of April 9 set off any sparks, they didn’t seem to catch in the moment. At one point, cops used their bikes as mobile barriers to push the crowd out of the street and onto the sidewalk. As a cop on a horse cornered the group, one demonstrator tossed a paint bomb right at the cop’s head. Incredibly, the paint-filled light bulb bounced unbroken off the helmet of the dazed cop, whose only reaction was a look of dim confusion. The paint bomb broke harmlessly on the street in a red splatter. Worse, the blow didn’t embolden the crowd. Instead, there was a collective gasp of shock: I can’t believe someone did that! In the end, the police cleared the streets, beating and arresting three demonstrators and capturing two others blocks away after they left. Despite the fact that the police had committed the only real violence, the five arrested faced charges including assaulting an officer and rioting. In addition, the local anti-authoritarian scene was soon parroting familiar stereotypes: those people ruined the protest for the rest of us; violence never solves anything. I went home having experienced a harsh reminder of where I was. This wasn’t Greece, or even Oakland, or even Portland. I lived in Seattle. The spell of social peace isn’t broken here. Nothing happens.
Less than a year later, anarchists were in the streets in black masks again. But I wasn’t lost in what I wished could happen. Something was happening. The occupied streets, the broken glass of police cruiser windows, the undercover forced out of the demonstration with a blow to the head, the smoke bombs hurled to keep horse cops at bay, the youth chanting “Eye for an eye, a pig’s gotta die!” — Seattle was seeing revolt explode beyond the control of both managed protests and state repression. This wasn’t an insurrection like Greece, or even a series of riots like Oakland. But for a brief period between January and March 2011, people broke years of inertia to interrupt the social peace. And, as in the struggles that had inspired us the preceding April, anarchists played a critical role in fueling the flames.
PDF Print / Read
Edited for mb3-org.com