Anews podcast – episode 22…

Welcome to the anews podcast. This is episode 22 for July 28. This podcast covers anarchist activity, ideas, and conversations from the previous week.

Editorial: On Heroes
TOTW – Sign of the Times
A101 question: Marx and Marxism

This podcast is the effort of many people. This week this podcast was
* sound edited by Linn O’Mable
* written by jackie and a thecollective member
* narrated by chisel and a friend
* Thanks to A! and ariel for their help with the topic of the week
* Contact us at
To learn more

Introduction to anarchism:
Books and other anarchist material:

Edited for

Sabotage in the American workplace: anecdotes of dissatisfaction, mischief and revenge

Sabotage in The Office

A truly fantastic study of everyday employee resistance at work. First person accounts of sabotage, beautifully illustrated and intermingled with related news clippings, facts and quotes.

Published in 1992.

If you enjoy this text, please become a Friend of the publishers, AK Press, or give them a donation here on their website:

Attachment Size
Sabotage-1.pdf 8.45 MB
Sabotage-2.pdf 9.53 MB
Sabotage-3.pdf 12.16 MB

Edited for

The article does not reflect the thoughts of the individuals on this website.

New Zines in Our Catalog

new zines


We’ve added a handful of zines to our catalog:

  • Affinity Groups: Essential Building Blocks of Anarchist Organization – A recent guide published by Crimethinc to forming an affinity group.
  • A Critique of Ally Politics – A zine-formatted version of an excellent essay that appeared originally in “Rolling Thunder” and then was later republished in Taking Sides: Revolutionary Solidarity and the Poverty of Liberalism.
  • The Delirious Momentum of the Revolt – This zine is billed as “the complete works of A.G. Schwarz.” It’s very solid writing from an insurrectionary anarchist perspective that draws heavily on Greece for inspiration.
  • In Our Hands #1 – This is zine is consists of writings by the In Our Hands collective about their work using a community accountability approach to address sexual violence, abuse, and oppression.
  • Insurrectionary Ecology – This zine is a collection of reflections that builds on the writings of the UK-based eco-anarchist journal Do or Die. The zine is a humble attempt to fuse more eco-oriented and insurrectionary perspectives.

As always, all of these zines (among many others) are available as PDF downloads. We’re always looking to add more zines to our catalog, so please get in touch with recommendations. We are particularly interested in zines that deal with practical skills and/or those that offer theoretical insights that are useful in sharpening anarchists’ collective capacity to act.

Edited for

TOTW: Don’t Get Trolled!

This week’s topic is near and dear to our hearts. Sometimes entertaining and often frustrating, trolling as a phenomenon is endemic to modern discourse, and this is especially true of political spaces. From people who veer discussions wildly off-topic with seemingly unrelated opinions to those who provoke frustration or even anger with opinions with which we disagree strongly, we are presented daily with complicated social interactions both online and offline. Trolls, by nature of their often provocative views and tendency to dominate discussions, may leave us feeling overwhelmed and ill-prepared to do anything but try and ignore them.

This topic of the week is about taking a more proactive stance on trolling without getting pulled into the cycle of trolling itself. Much as trolling often snowballs, on-topic comments which actively engage with the original topic of discussion or engage with it in a less unpleasant way can pull people out of the troll-spiral.

What are some concrete ways to shape a discussion to be interesting and engaging when we see it going off the rails? How can we make conversations that we don’t feel included in or feel frustrated with more interesting to us? How do we challenge views we disagree with without engaging in the often fruitless and unpleasant task of trying to engage a troll directly?

Here are some suggestions from the collective – we’d love to hear more in the comments!

  1. Point out something you like, don’t like, or are confused about in the original topic of discussion
  2. Mention something you’re reminded of in your past experiences or something you’ve read before that agrees or disagrees with the original piece – offering a link to a related article can help slow the discussion down and get people more involved in a more interesting way
  3. Offer a deeper analysis of an article – is what the piece is saying new or old? What kind of anarchy is it describing?
  4. What are the strengths and weaknesses of the arguments presented? What is it a good example of? What is it a bad example of?
  5. What would your favorite historical anarchist say about this?


Edited for

Texting Tips for the Brave: Guidelines for Using Signal

Signal is an amazing resource and a great tool for many groups of people to connect and communicate with each other. The intent and purpose of these groups can vary widely, from making dinner plans to organizing the next display of collective power. If you aren’t already using signal, you should be!

But simply using Signal isn’t enough to keep you and your friends safe. Our collective security is only as good as the individual with the least safe practices. So we outlined a few guidelines and protocols to help tighten your individual and collective practices.

/////////When creating a new group/////////

Be intentional about the purpose and who you add. Something to keep in mind before adding everyone on your contact list: you can’t remove someone once they are a part of the loop without abandoning the thread entirely or asking them to leave. Folx will not be able to actively voice their concerns once the group has been created.

Consider what you would do with someone who gets unilaterally added at the beginning that maybe isn’t double vouchable or that someone has concerns about. Also, don’t add people to sensitive groups without getting their consent first.

After the group is created, state the purpose of group and take roll call right away. Roll call,(name, city, group, pronouns), should be completed before conversation begins.

Do not add new people to threads without asking group first, and give people a designated amount of time to be able to voice their concerns ie: 24 hrs., since many folx can not be active on their phones every minute of the day. Encouraging questions or elaboration about a proposed new member can help create a better dialog than simply saying “vouch.”

Do a new roll call each time a new person is added so they know with whom they are talking.


According to the dictionary, to vouch means “to support as being true, certain, reliable” or “to attest; guarantee; certify.” In the political context, to vouch for someone means to state that you believe someone to be committed to the purpose of the group, trustworthy, reliable, and accountable.


Such “vouches” are important for groups of people working together who may not have previous experience working together, and require a certain level of trust and safety to comfortably and effectively work together. A vouching system allows 1 or more (the more the better) people to use the trust that they’ve earned from the group and extend it to someone they want to bring in. The necessity of vouches varies depending on what it is you are working on. Remember that a vouch is a personal reflection upon you, it is advised to not throw vouches around as it can undermine the safety, trust and cohesion of the group if it is an irresponsible vouch.

A vouch for if someone should be able to access a group’s members, conversations, goals and objectives, should be considered within the context of the objectives and risk of the group. The other members of the groups are trusting you to use discerning judgement when providing a vouch.


A vouch for if someone should be able to access a group’s members, conversations, goals and objectives, should be considered within the context of the objectives and risk of the group. The other members of the groups are trusting you to use discerning judgement when providing a vouch.

Some criteria that people have used for vouches include:

  • having met in person a certain number of times
  • have worked together on political projects for a certain period of time
  • knowing a certain number of people who have worked with the person for a certain period of time
  • knowing someone’s strengths and weakness (personally and politically) and how they act under pressure or in the face of repression
  • knowing how someone responds to criticism or feedback and how well they hold themselves accountable for their behavior
  • knowing someone’s extended family, childhood friends, and entire life story (just kidding…maybe…)

Vouches should be given for: people who you know and trust, who you know understands the objectives and degree of security required for the particular group, and who you know participates in solid security culture.

Vouches should not be given simply for “knowing they exist and do work” or “had a good conversation once or twice” though those things are a part of knowing and trusting someone.

The stringency of a vouch will vary based on the sensitivity of the information and the risks that the group is taking. If this is something you have not considered, please read up on security culture.

Whatever criteria or standard you use for vouching people, it is important that it be communicated to everyone in the group ahead of time, and that everyone is on the same page. Vouching is a word that gets thrown around often without elaboration, and people often have divergent ideas about what it means.

Digital security is no substitute for relational security. All the security culture/infosec protocol in the world can’t help you if one of the people you decide to trust with sensitive information turns out to be malicious, reckless, careless, or unaccountable.

/////////Protocol & Etiquette/////////

When installing Signal or getting a new phone number – inform groups beforehand so that they know to accept new security key. Or if you can’t let them know before hand let them know immediately after. Depending on level of security, meet in person or send screen shots of security numbers to verify new security numbers.

When using an android, always have a password on Signal app and a timeout feature. Unfortunately iOS doesn’t have this security feature yet. At a minimum, set a complex alphanumeric password for your entire phone. Shapes, patterns, and thumbprints/biometrics are not secure from a legal standpoint and the State can legally compel you to produce a thumbprint to access your data. Encrypt your phone as well.

Utilize the disappearing messages feature. Sometimes disappearing messages can get turned off automatically when someone reinstalls or a new person gets added. Make sure to reactivate disappearing messages.

Leave all groups and uninstall signal if you are attending an action or are in a situation that may lead to arrest and you have your phone with you. BUT… do not bring your personal phone into these situations if at all possible. You can read more about the danger of bringing your phone to actions here and a guide to if you are arrested here.

Leave all groups and uninstall Signal if you are crossing an international border. Laws protecting you from searches and seizures generally don’t apply at international borders. Strongly STRONGLY consider not taking your regular phone/tablet/laptop/etc. if you are traveling abroad.

If there is a security breach, such as if you are arrested with your phone or your home is raided, designate someone to start a new thread and leave the old one immediately (aka burn the thread). Make sure the threat is not transferred to the new loop. Designate one person to stay on the old thread to make sure everyone leaves. After you leave the thread, delete it. Delete threads regularly. 

In case of a lost/stolen phone or police confiscation, report immediately to a person you are in a thread with for them to alert others that they need to ditch the old thread with your number and restart.

/////////Checking in on Membership////////

Some groups are ephemeral and exist for a specific, short-term purpose and should be deleted after its purpose is complete. Groups that have an indefinite lifespan should regularly check in on membership to help eliminate loose ends.

Consider establishing requirements for checking-in/participating in the group discussion. Some groups regularly re-vouch their email lists or signal loops on a regular basis. Asking people to restate their interest in being on the list, and ensuring that no security concerns have arisen. Some groups may also choose to have requirements for people to check in or participate on a regular basis. Not hearing from someone for a certain designated period of time could indicate a security breach.

Remember: Sometimes even when people leave groups, they will continue to receive messages from the group (due to software glitches). If the groups information is sensitive, people leaving a group should be treated as a security breach and the thread should be burned.

Discussion of sensitive material – past, present, or future – should be only on a need to know basis, not an “I trust you” or “I think you’re cool” basis. Bragging, gossiping, and rumoring about illegal activities are dangerous behaviors that have no place in our movements, much less our signal loops.

Planning of actions should occur face to face – never digitally. All digital security has weaknesses and vulnerabilities. The more you know the weakness and limitations of your digital security, the better you can protect yourself.


Edited for

Anarchy Radio

Since the millennium change John Zerzan has been expressing his anti-civilization views on his one hour live radio show, “AnarchyRadio”. By audio streaming (KWVA 88.1 FM) you can listen to “AnarchyRadio” live each week on Tuesday’s at 7pm PST and express your views by calling 541-346-0645 during the live broadcast.


 Cops kill more blacks, dope epidemic rages, lethal heat waves e.g. in Southwest (street signs melt, jets can’t lift off, AC fails, homeless die). My ten days in Italy. Lake Chad almost gone, democracy in death throes? Nihilism leads to ITS fetish? 2/3 of all traffic deaths due to road rage. Cars, homes are traps for toxic air. Completely baseless tech claims. Girl Scouts to become cyber cops. Binky: the app that does nothing. One call.

Burning the Bridges They Are Building: Anarchist Strategies Against the Police in the Puget Sound, Winter 2011

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