California has a list of Rapid Response Network numbers that you can call if you see ICE activity. A friend can’t find a similar number for Las Vegas, does anyone in Nevada know of a similar system/nonprofit that you can report activity to and they’ll disseminate the info? Thanks

If you’re in CA, @norcal_resist on instagram has a post with all the rapid response numbers for California

Reporting ICE activity in Vegas?


Now Is The Time For Real Resistance


please do the judge, but i pretty much have an instagram addiction. ive also been using instagram for 10y at this point, so im a bit attached to my account. instagram has always been pretty worrisome, but with zucc becoming more and more of a political puppet, i want to get away from it..

what social media do you use?

alternative social media?


I beilieve a lot in anarchist action in the streets but because of police force that is getting bigger and bigger every day we have to be more careful of our actions. When it comes to graffiti i really beilieve at doing it but it becomes so hard to do every move when officers are secretally looking for you. Any opinion if it deserves to make antifascist and political graffities and if you think is benefecial, do you maybe have an advice when it comes to cops.

Should we spray greffiti in our neighbors?


I haven't been able to find anything and if there is spanish/english version available that's even better.

Does anyone have a Know Your Rights zine concenring ICE?

I haven&#39;t been able to find anything and if there is spanish/english version available that&#39;s even better.


https://www.whitehouse.gov/about-the-white-house/our-government/the-constitution/

I’d say that most of you, like myself, have our issues with the constitution, but this is terrifying

The constitution has been taken off whitehouse.gov


Hypernormalisation[documentary]

<iframe width="356" height="200" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Gr7T07WfIhM?feature=oembed&enablejsapi=1" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen title="Hypernormalisation | Full Documentary | Adam Curtis"></iframe>


hello everyone :)

i hope this does fit the guidelines here and stays on topic. i wanted to ask here, due to the values and interests we share. i figured this would be one of the better spaces to ask, then.

i am a student, and feel like pressure is put on me (especially by my mother) in order for me to get a "good diploma" and follow higher studies. an engineering degree, for example. the reason for this is something along the lines of this idea :

"Think of it this way: suffer through the schooling for a little bit, to set yourself up for the rest of your life", as a wonderful friend of mine put it. so, likely something along the lines of "well-paying jobs" and job security.

but this seems to be a very strange idea to me. i find that from when i was born to today, where i will soon be back on studies, i just spend so much time.. learning, studying, yet nothing to get a job NOW and be done with it all. or no support from my environment to do exactly that. i feel like most people try and convince me to stick to those studies, but i am genuinely confused as to why i couldn't just.. not follow higher studies, at least for now, and do something with my life.

the things i could actually do right now to help give to the community are majoritarily, if not all things i learned on my own or outside of school : using my proficiency in english as a french native for translation work, cooking which could be used to help communities, knowledge of software/IT which i could use to help communities and specific people with technology, such as the elderly... i could find more examples if i took more time, but i hope this gets the point across well.

since the start of those higher studies, i also questionned myself on some things. mainly :

- do we really need to follow higher studies (or at least, the "bigger" ones such as engineering) to have good stable jobs? as a young leftist/anarchist, i'm really doubting of the idea that we have to suffer through the schooling to set oneself up for life.

- what would those studies bring to us, both as individuals and for our communities ? so many people talk about doing higher studies, but i just struggle to find why we'd have to follow those to help people build a better world. is it just because of capitalism and the like?

i'm so confused by this idea. i imagine i can do things such as urban planning, but this only really works when governments want to use urban planning for a more social/ecological environment.. so why focus on this as a guarantee? if we can help our communities and people in similar ways without relying on those higher studies, is following those studies really so important?

sorry if this is all a confused, jumbled mess of words. as an anarchist and young adult, it's very hard to make a place for yourself in this world. i've tried to think about those issues for about a year and a half now but still do not get anywhere. i'm really lost and i don't know if anyone would have anything to say on the matter... i also hope this post is not interpreted as anti-intellectualism. i'm not against the idea of higher studies at all, moreso what those studies realistically lead you to do in the current world along the fact that we already have much of the knowledge we need to move forward and probably don't need to find/invent more things.

i hope all is well for you, and have a great day :)

# much needed TL;DR

i feel i am pressured into following studies, more specifically engineering studies as they "ensure a better job security and salary". this idea makes me feel alienated because i struggle to understand the point of studies *in a capitalist world* given everything we can already do to help communities without those higher studies. most of what could be done to help communities thanks to studies of most/any kind, such as philosophy, seem to have to depend on either governments (which seem increasingly far-right) or capitalist corporations, which would go against the interests of people at large. i'm aware that it's Slightly Hard to live a life distanced from capitalism, but if one wants to be as close to this life, i'm not sure of if following long studies would change this pratically. i'm also not very convinced of the idea that one has to do such studies to live a fulfilling life. you give meaning to yourself, studies don't give this meaning to you. i'm also pretty sure you can make job security work with such goals, and that if you live frugally the lower salaries won't be much of a problem.

Reflections on studies/jobs ; are studies this needed in the current world, for a "good" job ?

hello everyone :)

i hope this does fit the guidelines here and stays on topic. i wanted to ask here, due to the values and interests we share. i figured this would be one of the better spaces to ask, then.

i am a student, and feel like pressure is put on me (especially by my mother) in order for me to get a &quot;good diploma&quot; and follow higher studies. an engineering degree, for example. the reason for this is something along the lines of this idea :

&quot;Think of it this way: suffer through the schooling for a little bit, to set yourself up for the rest of your life&quot;, as a wonderful friend of mine put it. so, likely something along the lines of &quot;well-paying jobs&quot; and job security.

but this seems to be a very strange idea to me. i find that from when i was born to today, where i will soon be back on studies, i just spend so much time.. learning, studying, yet nothing to get a job NOW and be done with it all. or no support from my environment to do exactly that. i feel like most people try and convince me to stick to those studies, but i am genuinely confused as to why i couldn&#39;t just.. not follow higher studies, at least for now, and do something with my life.

the things i could actually do right now to help give to the community are majoritarily, if not all things i learned on my own or outside of school : using my proficiency in english as a french native for translation work, cooking which could be used to help communities, knowledge of software/IT which i could use to help communities and specific people with technology, such as the elderly... i could find more examples if i took more time, but i hope this gets the point across well.

since the start of those higher studies, i also questionned myself on some things. mainly :

do we really need to follow higher studies (or at least, the &quot;bigger&quot; ones such as engineering) to have good stable jobs? as a young leftist/anarchist, i&#39;m really doubting of the idea that we have to suffer through the schooling to set oneself up for life.

what would those studies bring to us, both as individuals and for our communities ? so many people talk about doing higher studies, but i just struggle to find why we&#39;d have to follow those to help people build a better world. is it just because of capitalism and the like?

i&#39;m so confused by this idea. i imagine i can do things such as urban planning, but this only really works when governments want to use urban planning for a more social/ecological environment.. so why focus on this as a guarantee? if we can help our communities and people in similar ways without relying on those higher studies, is following those studies really so important?

sorry if this is all a confused, jumbled mess of words. as an anarchist and young adult, it&#39;s very hard to make a place for yourself in this world. i&#39;ve tried to think about those issues for about a year and a half now but still do not get anywhere. i&#39;m really lost and i don&#39;t know if anyone would have anything to say on the matter... i also hope this post is not interpreted as anti-intellectualism. i&#39;m not against the idea of higher studies at all, moreso what those studies realistically lead you to do in the current world along the fact that we already have much of the knowledge we need to move forward and probably don&#39;t need to find/invent more things.

i hope all is well for you, and have a great day :)

much needed TL;DR

i feel i am pressured into following studies, more specifically engineering studies as they &quot;ensure a better job security and salary&quot;. this idea makes me feel alienated because i struggle to understand the point of studies in a capitalist world given everything we can already do to help communities without those higher studies. most of what could be done to help communities thanks to studies of most/any kind, such as philosophy, seem to have to depend on either governments (which seem increasingly far-right) or capitalist corporations, which would go against the interests of people at large. i&#39;m aware that it&#39;s Slightly Hard to live a life distanced from capitalism, but if one wants to be as close to this life, i&#39;m not sure of if following long studies would change this pratically. i&#39;m also not very convinced of the idea that one has to do such studies to live a fulfilling life. you give meaning to yourself, studies don&#39;t give this meaning to you. i&#39;m also pretty sure you can make job security work with such goals, and that if you live frugally the lower salaries won&#39;t be much of a problem.


It seems like Elon Musk is merely following his legacy.


On the Purpose of Unemployment - Michael Parenti

<iframe width="267" height="200" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/QKw3LuUM1jY?feature=oembed&enablejsapi=1" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen title="On the Purpose of Unemployment - Micheal Parenti"></iframe>


In the US we’ve lived through countless cycles of protest upsurge and burnout. Our moment calls for organization. If you’re an anarchist looking for a political home, members of Black Rose/Rosa Negra encourage you to reach out.


What you are reading, watching, or listening to? Or how far have you gotten in your chosen selection since last week?

What Are You Reading/Book Club Tuesday


As someone who was in college in 2016, and knew a lot of people that went to the J20 protests in black block, why wasn't there a similar response this time around?

I know I'm personally way more jaded now on any kind of national politics, so I focus on local politics and community building. But I'm curious as to why there wasn't a similar response this time. Was it the right wing presence? Disillusionment with propaganda of the deed? General lull in left wing activity? Or do y'all think it was partially from the crazy litigation against participants in 2016 J20?

No J20 protest?

As someone who was in college in 2016, and knew a lot of people that went to the J20 protests in black block, why wasn&#39;t there a similar response this time around?

I know I&#39;m personally way more jaded now on any kind of national politics, so I focus on local politics and community building. But I&#39;m curious as to why there wasn&#39;t a similar response this time. Was it the right wing presence? Disillusionment with propaganda of the deed? General lull in left wing activity? Or do y&#39;all think it was partially from the crazy litigation against participants in 2016 J20?


What’s your personal reason for being an anarchist?


it's extremely frustrating watching the media sane wash this, and the liberals i know keep talking about how "Musk (individually) has gone insane" and "we'll get them in the midterms". they really don't know how bad things can get

obviously this is just symptomatic of problems inherent to the state which has always existed, but it's still so frustrating to watch live

i feel like the world is constantly trying to gaslight me into to not believe things ive seen. im optimistic about the future, but theres so much work ahead of us

Musk Makes Nazi Salute at Inauguration

it&#39;s extremely frustrating watching the media sane wash this, and the liberals i know keep talking about how &quot;Musk (individually) has gone insane&quot; and &quot;we&#39;ll get them in the midterms&quot;. they really don&#39;t know how bad things can get

obviously this is just symptomatic of problems inherent to the state which has always existed, but it&#39;s still so frustrating to watch live

i feel like the world is constantly trying to gaslight me into to not believe things ive seen. im optimistic about the future, but theres so much work ahead of us


Biden commutes sentence of Leonard Peltier, Indigenous activist convicted in 1975 killings of 2 FBI agents


Joe Biden's Legacy of Failure, Hypocrisy, and Murder


Do We Need a Second New Deal?


Hi!

I am war reporter and also anarchist activist. So I am always struggling to make a living reporting honestly and continue my activism on anarchy.

How others are doing to be “artist-writer-photographer-designer” and also anarchist?

Is there a way to be a war reporter and an anarchist at the same time?


Hello, everyone! Hope you're all doing well. So, i'm an anarchist in my early 20s currently living in Brazil. I've met anarchists in here before, but the movement isn't very organized. I was hoping you could help me find a worldwide community where i could fit in. I'm looking for something where i can actually chat with people, not just throw things around like here, any help will be deeply appreciated!

Brazillian anarchist looking for worldwide anarchist friends

Hello, everyone! Hope you&#39;re all doing well. So, i&#39;m an anarchist in my early 20s currently living in Brazil. I&#39;ve met anarchists in here before, but the movement isn&#39;t very organized. I was hoping you could help me find a worldwide community where i could fit in. I&#39;m looking for something where i can actually chat with people, not just throw things around like here, any help will be deeply appreciated!


After 50 years, he finally gets to come home. This is a huge win and hopefully motivates others to get involved or stay involved in the abolitionist and political prisoner movements.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2025/01/20/statement-from-president-joe-biden-16/

Leonard is coming home, Free them All!


I've seen many critiques of the Zapatistas as "non-anarchist", and that has fundamentally shifted my perspective of anarchism. If indigenous self-organization is not anarchisim, then what is?

This is not a critique. I'm just struggling to think of literally any community in human history that was "actually anarchist". Because communities always enforce their own rules.

Is there no true anarchisim?

I&#39;ve seen many critiques of the Zapatistas as &quot;non-anarchist&quot;, and that has fundamentally shifted my perspective of anarchism. If indigenous self-organization is not anarchisim, then what is?

This is not a critique. I&#39;m just struggling to think of literally any community in human history that was &quot;actually anarchist&quot;. Because communities always enforce their own rules.


Proudhon in the 21st century - Freedom News


Have a mutual aid project you'd like to promote? In need of some aid yourself? Let us know.

&nbsp;

---

^Please ^note ^that ^r/Anarchism ^moderators  ^cannot ^individually ^verify ^or ^vet ^mutual ^aid ^requests

Mutual Aid Monday

Have a mutual aid project you&#39;d like to promote? In need of some aid yourself? Let us know.

&nbsp;

Please note that r/Anarchism moderators  cannot individually verify or vet mutual aid requests


Currently reading a paper titled "[Anarchism and Psychoanalysis](https://research.gold.ac.uk/id/eprint/19401/2/AnarchismandPsychoanalysis.pdf)" by Saul Newman. I don't know much about the guy, but the essay has been well-written and it's obviously well-researched and also obvious Newman has a fair amount of knowledge about both subjects so I'm taking it as a serious work.

I'm not finished yet so it's possible he's going to tell me what he thinks the answer is, but I'd like to have a discussion about what perhaps you all believe the answer is.

**So, the question:** In the world of an anarchist (in our current world or perhaps after a successful revolution) who/what would take on the role of the "primal father" as defined by Freud. Here is a quote from the essay describing the concept, "the primal father—the ultimate and original patriarch—has absolute power over his sons and demands from them devotion and obedience. The sons fear the primal father equally, thus creating a bond and sense of equality and community between them."

Here is how I'm viewing the situation: For anarchists, the primal father is the State. But I think that's only the most obvious answer and perhaps others have more interesting interpretations.

The quote above is followed by this, "However, as the father—the archetypal absolute sovereign—enjoys unrestricted access to all the women of tribe, prohibiting it to the sons, the sons band together to kill and devour the father. Yet, so the myth goes, this ultimate transgression creates a sense of collective guilt amongst the sons, and thus the law against incest arises. I will return to this later, as it has important consequences for this discussion: ***the removal of one form of prohibition does not necessarily free us as internalized constraints come to the fore to take its place.***"

Does that change your answer? It's made me think twice about mine, but I can't come up with another off the top of my head.

Anarchism and Psychoanalysis - "Primal Father" Discussion

Currently reading a paper titled &quot;Anarchism and Psychoanalysis&quot; by Saul Newman. I don&#39;t know much about the guy, but the essay has been well-written and it&#39;s obviously well-researched and also obvious Newman has a fair amount of knowledge about both subjects so I&#39;m taking it as a serious work.

I&#39;m not finished yet so it&#39;s possible he&#39;s going to tell me what he thinks the answer is, but I&#39;d like to have a discussion about what perhaps you all believe the answer is.

So, the question: In the world of an anarchist (in our current world or perhaps after a successful revolution) who/what would take on the role of the &quot;primal father&quot; as defined by Freud. Here is a quote from the essay describing the concept, &quot;the primal father—the ultimate and original patriarch—has absolute power over his sons and demands from them devotion and obedience. The sons fear the primal father equally, thus creating a bond and sense of equality and community between them.&quot;

Here is how I&#39;m viewing the situation: For anarchists, the primal father is the State. But I think that&#39;s only the most obvious answer and perhaps others have more interesting interpretations.

The quote above is followed by this, &quot;However, as the father—the archetypal absolute sovereign—enjoys unrestricted access to all the women of tribe, prohibiting it to the sons, the sons band together to kill and devour the father. Yet, so the myth goes, this ultimate transgression creates a sense of collective guilt amongst the sons, and thus the law against incest arises. I will return to this later, as it has important consequences for this discussion: the removal of one form of prohibition does not necessarily free us as internalized constraints come to the fore to take its place.&quot;

Does that change your answer? It&#39;s made me think twice about mine, but I can&#39;t come up with another off the top of my head.


Probably past time, but it's mostly just me here now, and January is tough so tbh I forgot. Many apologies :(

Anyway, mod elections.

##If you do not have access to /r/metanarchism AND [qualify for entry,](https://www.reddit.com/r/metanarchism/wiki/entry-requirements#wiki_meta_entry_requirements) message [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FAnarchism&subject=&message=) to be added

Guidelines:

You may nominate any user to become a moderator, including yourself, as long as said user is an anarchist and qualifies for r/metanarchism.

You may make multiple nominations.

You may propose removal of an existing mod.

Normal meta rules on voting apply, except for the following exceptions/clarifications:

>nominations and removals should be proposed in top level comments, and votes on a nomination/removal should be made in reply to it for ease of counting

> votes on removing existing mods will be treated as proposals to remove, meaning they require 2/3rds to vote for removal in order to pass

>each nomination or removal requires its own 10-vote quorum to be considered valid under the quorum rule

It's Time for Mod Elections Again | Jan 20 - Jan 27

Probably past time, but it&#39;s mostly just me here now, and January is tough so tbh I forgot. Many apologies :(

Anyway, mod elections.

If you do not have access to /r/metanarchism AND qualify for entry, message modmail to be added

Guidelines:

You may nominate any user to become a moderator, including yourself, as long as said user is an anarchist and qualifies for r/metanarchism.

You may make multiple nominations.

You may propose removal of an existing mod.

Normal meta rules on voting apply, except for the following exceptions/clarifications:

nominations and removals should be proposed in top level comments, and votes on a nomination/removal should be made in reply to it for ease of counting

votes on removing existing mods will be treated as proposals to remove, meaning they require 2/3rds to vote for removal in order to pass

each nomination or removal requires its own 10-vote quorum to be considered valid under the quorum rule


When I see the term Neo-Luddite online, I often see people like Ted Kaczynski brought up. Technophobes, rather than the Techno-Skepticist that make up the majority of the decentralized movement, just like how the original Luddites were painted as anti-technology when they were really just opposed to the centralization of industry and its place over their lives. I just want to state that I am not against tech. I love technology, I love computers, I love the internet, I love video games. As a millennial, these were my childhood. If you knew me irl, you might think I was a Retro-Tech fetishist. Someone who is obsessed with Web 1.0 and the aesthetics of the 2000s. While that is true, I have my reasons:

The current state of technology is that of classism, militarism, surveillance and exploitation of resources, labor and the environment. I am not fine with tech being used in such ways, and that as Anarchists we must stand by our morals and search for a way to undermine it. Here are a few things I propose for other Techno-Skeptics/Neo-Luddites:

* Minimalist Tech: Buy an MP3 player or a higher end DAP if you need it, learn how to torrent and or just rip the tracks off of your own CDs. Prioritize dumb devices that have specific usages over smart devices fhat have connections to the internet. Smartphone is your worst enemy, it is a distraction, a surveillance camera and a tool of psychological manipulation. I would suggest buying burners or flip phones over high end products like Iphone or Galaxy too. Buy a handheld console that boots roms. Stuff like that. Dont use streaming services, don't pay unless you are paying to support the development of the media, or to own the data forever.
* Digital Minimalism: (This somewhat ties into the Minimalist tech but I thought I would make its own section) Limit the time you spend on devices. This doesn't exactly mean spend less time on digital devices, especially if thats your job or outlet for activism, you might want to, but to use them with intent. Limit your devices that are connected to the internet, have a singular device that is for using the internet. The internet is an extremely powerful tool for activism, spreading awareness, sharing media and opinions, but it can be a double edged sword when going in blind, and or if you are vulnerable to their manipulation, such as if you are a gambling addict, shopping addict, etc. Breaking yourself from that connection that these corporations have over your attention is key.
* Software Minimalism and Modular Design: These are core tenets of the Unix Philosophy. Supporting, using or creating simple, efficient and accessible software. A focus in smaller file sizes, less resource intensiveness and ease of use is a way to democratize data and to make it more widely available to the general public. The smaller the file, the less incentive you have to delete it. The easier the code, the easier it is to modify, to innovate and to learn from. The more widely utilizable it will be. For example, take video games. People in both First and Third World countries can play games like Minecraft together more easily they can play Call of Duty: Black Ops 6 together, and it will have more longevity and improvements as a result of its ability to be customized and played in almost any device.
* Embrace and host Third Spaces on the Internet: There needs to be places away from Capitalist interest online. There is a big attack on our freedom of speech with the Tik Tok ban, on apps like Twitter, as well as Facebook. Hell, Reddit is most likely a psyop. Whilst these can be good tools for outreach in specific instances, they should not be your primary method of interacting with the internet or communication as they are multibillion dollar companies, companies who do not have your best interest at heart, as they have proven time and time again. They steal your data, they manipulate your perception, they utilize algorithms to control the stream of information. Not good. I would suggest sites like SPACEHEY (a Myspace clone that allows you to customize your profile with html graphics, music players, etc. It only takes donations and sells merch. Thats it. Free to use.) MASTADON (A decentralized Twitter clone that hosts multiple smaller servers rather than just one) DISCORD (A server hosting site where you can set up your own servers that have chat channels, voice channels, you can stream, etc) TELEGRAM (A free encrypted messsging app that allows you to create group channels and share up to 1gb filesize. Great for hosting books, information or just talking) or SUBSTACK (a site that allows to write and share articles). Or hell, make your own site. I'll be the first person on your message board.

Anyways, Ill end it here for sake of my thumbs. I am really passionate about this topic and I thank you for reading all the way through. I hope you all enjoy your day!  If you have any thoughts, or something you want to add, lmk.

Reclaiming Neo-Luddism from the Technophobes.

When I see the term Neo-Luddite online, I often see people like Ted Kaczynski brought up. Technophobes, rather than the Techno-Skepticist that make up the majority of the decentralized movement, just like how the original Luddites were painted as anti-technology when they were really just opposed to the centralization of industry and its place over their lives. I just want to state that I am not against tech. I love technology, I love computers, I love the internet, I love video games. As a millennial, these were my childhood. If you knew me irl, you might think I was a Retro-Tech fetishist. Someone who is obsessed with Web 1.0 and the aesthetics of the 2000s. While that is true, I have my reasons:

The current state of technology is that of classism, militarism, surveillance and exploitation of resources, labor and the environment. I am not fine with tech being used in such ways, and that as Anarchists we must stand by our morals and search for a way to undermine it. Here are a few things I propose for other Techno-Skeptics/Neo-Luddites:

Minimalist Tech: Buy an MP3 player or a higher end DAP if you need it, learn how to torrent and or just rip the tracks off of your own CDs. Prioritize dumb devices that have specific usages over smart devices fhat have connections to the internet. Smartphone is your worst enemy, it is a distraction, a surveillance camera and a tool of psychological manipulation. I would suggest buying burners or flip phones over high end products like Iphone or Galaxy too. Buy a handheld console that boots roms. Stuff like that. Dont use streaming services, don&#39;t pay unless you are paying to support the development of the media, or to own the data forever.

Digital Minimalism: (This somewhat ties into the Minimalist tech but I thought I would make its own section) Limit the time you spend on devices. This doesn&#39;t exactly mean spend less time on digital devices, especially if thats your job or outlet for activism, you might want to, but to use them with intent. Limit your devices that are connected to the internet, have a singular device that is for using the internet. The internet is an extremely powerful tool for activism, spreading awareness, sharing media and opinions, but it can be a double edged sword when going in blind, and or if you are vulnerable to their manipulation, such as if you are a gambling addict, shopping addict, etc. Breaking yourself from that connection that these corporations have over your attention is key.

Software Minimalism and Modular Design: These are core tenets of the Unix Philosophy. Supporting, using or creating simple, efficient and accessible software. A focus in smaller file sizes, less resource intensiveness and ease of use is a way to democratize data and to make it more widely available to the general public. The smaller the file, the less incentive you have to delete it. The easier the code, the easier it is to modify, to innovate and to learn from. The more widely utilizable it will be. For example, take video games. People in both First and Third World countries can play games like Minecraft together more easily they can play Call of Duty: Black Ops 6 together, and it will have more longevity and improvements as a result of its ability to be customized and played in almost any device.

Embrace and host Third Spaces on the Internet: There needs to be places away from Capitalist interest online. There is a big attack on our freedom of speech with the Tik Tok ban, on apps like Twitter, as well as Facebook. Hell, Reddit is most likely a psyop. Whilst these can be good tools for outreach in specific instances, they should not be your primary method of interacting with the internet or communication as they are multibillion dollar companies, companies who do not have your best interest at heart, as they have proven time and time again. They steal your data, they manipulate your perception, they utilize algorithms to control the stream of information. Not good. I would suggest sites like SPACEHEY (a Myspace clone that allows you to customize your profile with html graphics, music players, etc. It only takes donations and sells merch. Thats it. Free to use.) MASTADON (A decentralized Twitter clone that hosts multiple smaller servers rather than just one) DISCORD (A server hosting site where you can set up your own servers that have chat channels, voice channels, you can stream, etc) TELEGRAM (A free encrypted messsging app that allows you to create group channels and share up to 1gb filesize. Great for hosting books, information or just talking) or SUBSTACK (a site that allows to write and share articles). Or hell, make your own site. I&#39;ll be the first person on your message board.

Anyways, Ill end it here for sake of my thumbs. I am really passionate about this topic and I thank you for reading all the way through. I hope you all enjoy your day!  If you have any thoughts, or something you want to add, lmk.


It would make sense i think.
Am i wrong in assuming that there are a lot of anarchist programmer types out there?

Why hasn't some anarchist programmer group made a stock bot to give wealth to the masses?


I’m a 22-year-old recent college graduate with a deep interest in sociology, politics, philosophy, and the broader systems that shape our society. I’m looking to expand my understanding of how the US operates politically, economically, legislatively, and its role in the world.

I don’t believe in the two-party system and aim to explore ideas across the political spectrum to form well-rounded opinions. While my values lean left, I’m deeply critical of elitist leadership, which seems to persist regardless of party affiliation.

I’m especially interested in resources like videos, documentaries, blogs, articles, journals, or books that explore the intersections of politics, the economy, and human rights. My ultimate goal is to deepen my knowledge so I can actively participate in preserving and advancing human rights in this country.

Are there any recommendations or resources that have helped you better understand these topics?

Resources to Expand My Knowledge on US Politics, Economy, and Global Role?


The Offending Article

<iframe width="267" height="200" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/QqjIlfG4yvA?feature=oembed&enablejsapi=1" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen title="The Offending Article"></iframe>

The Offending Article

The Offending Article


Alexander Atabekian was an Armenian Anarcho-Communist. He lived near the same time as the Russian Revolution and much of his writing makes reference to it. He liked Kropotkin in particular

I initially wrote off Alexander Atabekian for some reason. I think it's because I started with his essay on "territoriality," which was not the best place to start, and doesn't seem reflective of his larger body of work. If he had any larger works, they're not on the anarchist library, but what is there is succinct and echoes other "classicals" with a lucidity that I wasn't expecting

I've never heard Atabekian's name come up in any anarchist discussion. I guess it would make sense if he didn't write that much, but I've heard Reclus name. He didn't write much either I don't think, besides the geography. So here is some stuff Atabekian wrote, which I liked. I will link each piece to each piece. They're all very short

More than once Atabekian uses "power" and "authority" interchangeably, as I think someone like Louise Michel does. He will also occasionally make reference to "moral authority". I believe this is a figure of speech however, maybe similar in his diction to "confidence". He will just as or more often repudiate authority in its entirety, and lays out clearly, with direct reference to right, a conceptualization of the latter that seems to easily fall within the authority held in contempt by other anarchists

> What characterises anarchism, what is common to all anarchists, whatever their starting point and way of thinking, is the rejection of authority, the denial of the right of people to forcibly subjugate other people, even if the power comes from a numerical majority. Diderot formulated this thought in the following words: “Nature has created neither masters nor servants; I want neither to make nor to receive laws”.

-[The Old and New in Anarchism](https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/alexander-atabekian-the-old-and-new-in-anarchism)

Tangentially, he has a second and uncompromising repudiation of democracy, up to and including "direct legislation".

> By its other basic property, the free association of individuals, with the right of each of them to withdraw from the association at any time, co-operation excludes coercion. Being free and voluntary in its internal construction, co-operation is hostile to external violence, which is an inevitable property of state power. Politically, co-operation can be neither monarchical, nor republican, nor democratic (as V. Kilchevsky claims), nor Soviet, since coercion is inherent in all power. Even under the most ideal state system, under direct popular legislation of property equal people, the majority subordinates the minority to its will.

-[Co-operation and Anarchism](https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/alexander-atabekian-co-operation-and-anarchism)

He talked about Bolshevism a lot. He didn't like it. His critique of "class struggle" particularly as it was understood and exercised by the Bolsheviks I found resonant

> Thus capital, from the largest to the smallest amounts, are closely woven into the process of production, exchange and distribution of products. The class of capitalists is diffused throughout society and it is not possible to single it out into a separate class.

> Class struggle is the frozen dogma of the faith of all socialists and even of many anarchists. The terrible consequences of the widespread dissemination and application of this scientifically untenable theory in the ignorant masses of the Russian people, we have seen and experienced since the February Revolution, especially after the triumph of the direct heirs of the International — the Social-Democrats (Bolsheviks), in close contact (for the first time in history) with their co- heirs — the anarchists.

> After the October coup d’état, which became so bloody thanks to the exaltation instilled by this theory, the “bourgeois” began to be searched for. But the search was in vain. The crimes of capitalism were in plain sight, but the criminal himself was elusive. It turned out that the bourgeoisie, as a class of people, had been absorbed into the middle, and even partly into the lower strata of the population. It was possible to point to some individual rich people, but even those have long since disappeared… They continued to look for the bourgeoisie, and in Moscow they found it in the person of Osip Minor, who had grown old because of his struggle for socialism in prisons and penal servitude, and his comrades in the party, in the person of the revolutionary officers and that part of the student youth which had rallied round the party of the Socialist-Revolutionaries, while the other part had joined the Bolsheviks. And nightmarish events took place, fraternal blood was shed on both sides in glorification of the new dogma of the faith of the ignorant people — the class struggle. This dogma awakened the spirit of fanaticism dormant in every ignorant man. And the darkest times of religious persecution were resurrected..…

-[The Old and New in Anarchism](https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/alexander-atabekian-the-old-and-new-in-anarchism)

A very Kropotkin-y line here, I believe part of this might be a direct quote

> anarchy is above all the freedom of the individual, bounded only by the equal freedom of another individual, whoever he may be by conviction; it is natural morality without sanction or compulsion.

-[Questions of Theory and Practice](https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/alexander-atabekian-questions-of-theory-and-practice)

Anti-coercion is a big part of his project, which I agree with less, but I do find parts of it enchanting

> The anarchist who raises his hand to search another person, even if only for weapons, is no longer a proud ideological anarchist; he is lower than the last policeman; at least he does not hide behind the banner of freedom. The anarchist who crosses the threshold of another’s dwelling to search it, even if only again for weapons, is a criminal against the high and pure doctrine which our ideological opponents consider unattainable.

-[Questions of Theory and Practice](https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/alexander-atabekian-questions-of-theory-and-practice)

So provided Atabekian's uncompromising anti-authority anarchy, I see a complication of anarchism's ideological commitments that seems like it echoes through other places. It is the ground floor for his anarchism, opposing authority as a path to liberty and things of that nature

There are more pieces, some on organization. His talk here is similarly eloquent. He talks much about approaching anarchy as science, and speaks of trouble with anarchist "congresses" that couldn't bind their members, and otherwise became fraught with disintegration and new authorities. Insofar as anarchy is science, for Alexander Atabekian, this is no problem, because a conference is not where those decisions are made; organization is concerned principally with what is possible - external constraints, rather than consensus, the decision-making of majorities, etc.., and I think too a thread of individual works coalescing into collective action

> Just as the scientific congresses contributed little to science, because no binding resolutions were possible and science develops and grows through painstaking laboratory and office work, so too the anarchist congresses gave the comrades who came together an opportunity for personal communication and exchange of opinions, but that was all; they played no organisational role. The modern anarchist movement has grown and consolidated in its original groups.

-[Questions of Theory and Practice](https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/alexander-atabekian-questions-of-theory-and-practice)

> We are not talking about other inconveniences of the central organization. Let’s just say that a large part of the Armenian revolutionaries experienced the destructive and harmful influence of that “center” on their skin and was forced to withdraw from that idea. If until now those “centers” have not finally destroyed the cause, the reason is that the cause itself is an essential, organic demand for the people and continues outside the centers, independently of them and often against all of them.

> “So, in your opinion,” they answer us, “the general organization of the revolutionary force is impossible?” Not at all. The only thing that follows from what we have said is that we need to look for other means and forms of organization — that we should not work in vain efforts and in vain time to form a unity of Yanun activity, but we must work with all our strength for the Yanun revolution, from which itself gave birth to a union and a permanent organization.

> ...activity, life develops a common plan of action for Armenian revolutionaries, then the place of current theoretical disputes will be replaced by a practical solidarity among various perfectly independent groups, none of which will try to impose either its principles or its tactics on the heads of others, and only then will we have a true organization — an organization that will arise from vital conditions, from the efforts made — an organization that will be based on the direct and close relations of the working groups.

-[Revolutionary Organization](https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/alexander-atabekian-revolutionary-organization)

Some of his writing was on World War I. In "The Problem of a Free Army," he says that he worked as a doctor for two years in the Russian Army. His description of the way wartime economics undermined capitalism is very interesting, I don't know if it's more wholly his or if he derives this from somewhere

> The world war destroyed the foundations of the capitalist economy, while the October revolution continues its work and destroys the very forms of the capitalist system.

> War, that factor of discord, oppression and destruction, this time became fruitful and constructive. This was because, in its unprecedented size and duration, it shook up the entire economic life of the globe. It became a literal war of nations and subjugated all strata of society to its equalizing demands.

> It has barely disguised the extensive expropriations of private property by the name of requisitions; it has destroyed free trade by fixing prices; it has sought to equalise all strata of the
population by food organisations for the equal distribution of essential foodstuffs. In short, the foundations of the capitalist system have been struck blow by blow, and this not only in our own country, but to an even greater extent in central and western Europe. The stronghold of class divisions, governmental power, has so far survived, but even in it large holes have been punctured.

> This unification of all strata of society in Western Europe has already begun to bear fruit, it is rebuilding the social order on new principles more methodically and firmly than we have in Russia; this reorganisation of the social order of the West is pointed out by Kropotkin in his “Letters on Current Events”, and only due to poor knowledge, due to the conditions of wartime, we can not take a closer look at this creative side of life in Europe, caused by the current war. In Russia, this association emerged and blossomed in the direction of social construction in the early years of the war. It found a wide field of practical application, rich material and useful experience in the activities of the All-Russian Zemsky Union and other public organisations. The business of organising aid to millions of refugees — to whole nations — became a school of practical socialism. Then the activity of public organisations spread to the greatest part of the population. It was their fruitful activity that created our food organisations and developed the initial technique of supplying and distributing foodstuffs.

-The Old and New

I thought his accusation specifically of the way authoritarian organization undermined the Russian army's capacity to fight was interesting too. Reminiscent of Bakunin, who theorized that authority is caustic to expertise (which Alexander Atabekian proposes that he witnessed in practice). I do not know if this is grounded in good history, but his perspective is neat

> After the February Revolution, which was to change the whole way of social life in the whole country, it was clear to everyone that the army could not retain its old forms. It, too, had to be renewed. What did the scientifically educated officers, as a professional category, do to point out to the broad layers of the people and the soldiering masses the right ways for renewal? Exactly nothing. We had officers with solid scientific knowledge and combat experience, but we had no officers. There was no purely professional spirit of association among our officers, standing beyond and above political and social beliefs and views. The army was led not by united professional workers, but by disparate officials appointed at the discretion of their superiors from above. This is what ruined the army in the first place.

> The truth is that we did not have a purely professional association of officers on the basis of technical knowledge, which would have enjoyed moral authority and would have been able to take into its own hands the work of army renewal from the very beginning. Our officers in the general mass, without initiative, without social outlook, with their thinking squeezed into the deadening framework of routine, were not capable of taking the lead in the reorganisation of the army on new principles, and by habit became inert, waiting for orders from above or clinging to the decaying old forms. From above came the political agitators, driven by the phantoms of the old power. From above came demagogues, chasing themselves after the power that intoxicates man. The results — we have read them in the Brest peace treaty and are reading them in Mirbach’s notes.

> From this point of view, any anarchist-revolutionary — for defensive war is essentially an organised revolution against external state oppressors — can only welcome the initiative of “Military Affairs”. It is high time to make military affairs purely professional, to transfer them to the healthy ground of “knowledge and skill” instead of “what do you want?” and “I obey!” before the state power.

> Authority can call any accumulation of people an “army,” such as the “Red Army,” but it cannot make it an army.

-[The Problem of a Free Army](https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/alexander-atabekian-the-problem-of-a-free-army)

With regards to "Territoriality and Anarchism" I have mixed feelings, because I think there is an interesting point at the center of the work (given a certain tendency to view humans and environments and "organistic" to each other, although I do not know if that's a misapplication of Proudhon's unity-collectivity).

> If we look closely at the life of individual animal families and their societies, we will notice that each of them uses a certain place of residence — nest, burrow, den, anthill, beehive — and a relatively limited space of land, i.e. the territory on which it harvests the means for its own existence and for the preservation of the species (offspring). Even migratory birds, and those at different times of the year, return to their former home and old nest. The same is observed in nomadic tribes, which do not wander around the world wherever they see fit, but have their own definite kyshlagi and eylagi (as nomadic Tatars call the places of their winter and summer stay).

> The connection with the homeland is so strong in man that even with the modern extraordinary development of communication routes, people are very reluctant to move from their homeland, and then only under the pressure of irresistible economic necessity.

> Anarchism has so far put forward the territorial homeland — the commune — as its closest political ideal, because it was easier to imagine and realise a just social order there. But doom inevitably awaits the commune in a surrounding, hostile environment, as happened to Paris in 1871. In order to establish itself, anarchism must develop forms of organisation of large defensible units and then unite other countries more and more closely with its cultural influence. This is the direction in which the revival of the Anarchist International must be sought.

-[Territoriality and Anarchism](https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/alexander-atabekian-territoriality-and-anarchism)

I'm unsure about his usage of "commune" as a territorial homeland, however now with the additional context of his other work I'm also not sure if he's using this in any particular national sense. I don't think he is. It almost seems like the essay is less about territoriality and more concerned with addressing the divide created by WW1 between "anti-militarist" anarchists and anarchists who supported the Entente. His point basically seems to be that neither option makes sense and that when an *anarchist* "homeland" is created (a "homeland" within his concept being any locality where they live and are organized towards) there's a coherent basis for attacking -archic forces that want to assimilate it. This seems like an unobjectionable position

There's some other things of his I haven't read, and I will now. I feel comfortable keeping his work in my back pocket as a "starting point" for most people, as much of this seems pure anarchism and not strictly anarcho-communism. His collection of ideas seems like ittouches a lot of important bases and does it in an easily readable way

Two last quotes that seem to wrap it up

> Theoretical anarchism is a science; its practice must become an applied science.

> You have to act to organize. Action, constant action — this is the only way to organization.

Alexander Atabekian's Anarchist Communism

Alexander Atabekian was an Armenian Anarcho-Communist. He lived near the same time as the Russian Revolution and much of his writing makes reference to it. He liked Kropotkin in particular

I initially wrote off Alexander Atabekian for some reason. I think it&#39;s because I started with his essay on &quot;territoriality,&quot; which was not the best place to start, and doesn&#39;t seem reflective of his larger body of work. If he had any larger works, they&#39;re not on the anarchist library, but what is there is succinct and echoes other &quot;classicals&quot; with a lucidity that I wasn&#39;t expecting

I&#39;ve never heard Atabekian&#39;s name come up in any anarchist discussion. I guess it would make sense if he didn&#39;t write that much, but I&#39;ve heard Reclus name. He didn&#39;t write much either I don&#39;t think, besides the geography. So here is some stuff Atabekian wrote, which I liked. I will link each piece to each piece. They&#39;re all very short

More than once Atabekian uses &quot;power&quot; and &quot;authority&quot; interchangeably, as I think someone like Louise Michel does. He will also occasionally make reference to &quot;moral authority&quot;. I believe this is a figure of speech however, maybe similar in his diction to &quot;confidence&quot;. He will just as or more often repudiate authority in its entirety, and lays out clearly, with direct reference to right, a conceptualization of the latter that seems to easily fall within the authority held in contempt by other anarchists

What characterises anarchism, what is common to all anarchists, whatever their starting point and way of thinking, is the rejection of authority, the denial of the right of people to forcibly subjugate other people, even if the power comes from a numerical majority. Diderot formulated this thought in the following words: “Nature has created neither masters nor servants; I want neither to make nor to receive laws”.

-The Old and New in Anarchism

Tangentially, he has a second and uncompromising repudiation of democracy, up to and including &quot;direct legislation&quot;.

By its other basic property, the free association of individuals, with the right of each of them to withdraw from the association at any time, co-operation excludes coercion. Being free and voluntary in its internal construction, co-operation is hostile to external violence, which is an inevitable property of state power. Politically, co-operation can be neither monarchical, nor republican, nor democratic (as V. Kilchevsky claims), nor Soviet, since coercion is inherent in all power. Even under the most ideal state system, under direct popular legislation of property equal people, the majority subordinates the minority to its will.

-Co-operation and Anarchism

He talked about Bolshevism a lot. He didn&#39;t like it. His critique of &quot;class struggle&quot; particularly as it was understood and exercised by the Bolsheviks I found resonant

Thus capital, from the largest to the smallest amounts, are closely woven into the process of production, exchange and distribution of products. The class of capitalists is diffused throughout society and it is not possible to single it out into a separate class.

Class struggle is the frozen dogma of the faith of all socialists and even of many anarchists. The terrible consequences of the widespread dissemination and application of this scientifically untenable theory in the ignorant masses of the Russian people, we have seen and experienced since the February Revolution, especially after the triumph of the direct heirs of the International — the Social-Democrats (Bolsheviks), in close contact (for the first time in history) with their co- heirs — the anarchists.

After the October coup d’état, which became so bloody thanks to the exaltation instilled by this theory, the “bourgeois” began to be searched for. But the search was in vain. The crimes of capitalism were in plain sight, but the criminal himself was elusive. It turned out that the bourgeoisie, as a class of people, had been absorbed into the middle, and even partly into the lower strata of the population. It was possible to point to some individual rich people, but even those have long since disappeared… They continued to look for the bourgeoisie, and in Moscow they found it in the person of Osip Minor, who had grown old because of his struggle for socialism in prisons and penal servitude, and his comrades in the party, in the person of the revolutionary officers and that part of the student youth which had rallied round the party of the Socialist-Revolutionaries, while the other part had joined the Bolsheviks. And nightmarish events took place, fraternal blood was shed on both sides in glorification of the new dogma of the faith of the ignorant people — the class struggle. This dogma awakened the spirit of fanaticism dormant in every ignorant man. And the darkest times of religious persecution were resurrected..…

-The Old and New in Anarchism

A very Kropotkin-y line here, I believe part of this might be a direct quote

anarchy is above all the freedom of the individual, bounded only by the equal freedom of another individual, whoever he may be by conviction; it is natural morality without sanction or compulsion.

-Questions of Theory and Practice

Anti-coercion is a big part of his project, which I agree with less, but I do find parts of it enchanting

The anarchist who raises his hand to search another person, even if only for weapons, is no longer a proud ideological anarchist; he is lower than the last policeman; at least he does not hide behind the banner of freedom. The anarchist who crosses the threshold of another’s dwelling to search it, even if only again for weapons, is a criminal against the high and pure doctrine which our ideological opponents consider unattainable.

-Questions of Theory and Practice

So provided Atabekian&#39;s uncompromising anti-authority anarchy, I see a complication of anarchism&#39;s ideological commitments that seems like it echoes through other places. It is the ground floor for his anarchism, opposing authority as a path to liberty and things of that nature

There are more pieces, some on organization. His talk here is similarly eloquent. He talks much about approaching anarchy as science, and speaks of trouble with anarchist &quot;congresses&quot; that couldn&#39;t bind their members, and otherwise became fraught with disintegration and new authorities. Insofar as anarchy is science, for Alexander Atabekian, this is no problem, because a conference is not where those decisions are made; organization is concerned principally with what is possible - external constraints, rather than consensus, the decision-making of majorities, etc.., and I think too a thread of individual works coalescing into collective action

Just as the scientific congresses contributed little to science, because no binding resolutions were possible and science develops and grows through painstaking laboratory and office work, so too the anarchist congresses gave the comrades who came together an opportunity for personal communication and exchange of opinions, but that was all; they played no organisational role. The modern anarchist movement has grown and consolidated in its original groups.

-Questions of Theory and Practice

We are not talking about other inconveniences of the central organization. Let’s just say that a large part of the Armenian revolutionaries experienced the destructive and harmful influence of that “center” on their skin and was forced to withdraw from that idea. If until now those “centers” have not finally destroyed the cause, the reason is that the cause itself is an essential, organic demand for the people and continues outside the centers, independently of them and often against all of them.

“So, in your opinion,” they answer us, “the general organization of the revolutionary force is impossible?” Not at all. The only thing that follows from what we have said is that we need to look for other means and forms of organization — that we should not work in vain efforts and in vain time to form a unity of Yanun activity, but we must work with all our strength for the Yanun revolution, from which itself gave birth to a union and a permanent organization.

...activity, life develops a common plan of action for Armenian revolutionaries, then the place of current theoretical disputes will be replaced by a practical solidarity among various perfectly independent groups, none of which will try to impose either its principles or its tactics on the heads of others, and only then will we have a true organization — an organization that will arise from vital conditions, from the efforts made — an organization that will be based on the direct and close relations of the working groups.

-Revolutionary Organization

Some of his writing was on World War I. In &quot;The Problem of a Free Army,&quot; he says that he worked as a doctor for two years in the Russian Army. His description of the way wartime economics undermined capitalism is very interesting, I don&#39;t know if it&#39;s more wholly his or if he derives this from somewhere

The world war destroyed the foundations of the capitalist economy, while the October revolution continues its work and destroys the very forms of the capitalist system.

War, that factor of discord, oppression and destruction, this time became fruitful and constructive. This was because, in its unprecedented size and duration, it shook up the entire economic life of the globe. It became a literal war of nations and subjugated all strata of society to its equalizing demands.

It has barely disguised the extensive expropriations of private property by the name of requisitions; it has destroyed free trade by fixing prices; it has sought to equalise all strata of the
population by food organisations for the equal distribution of essential foodstuffs. In short, the foundations of the capitalist system have been struck blow by blow, and this not only in our own country, but to an even greater extent in central and western Europe. The stronghold of class divisions, governmental power, has so far survived, but even in it large holes have been punctured.

This unification of all strata of society in Western Europe has already begun to bear fruit, it is rebuilding the social order on new principles more methodically and firmly than we have in Russia; this reorganisation of the social order of the West is pointed out by Kropotkin in his “Letters on Current Events”, and only due to poor knowledge, due to the conditions of wartime, we can not take a closer look at this creative side of life in Europe, caused by the current war. In Russia, this association emerged and blossomed in the direction of social construction in the early years of the war. It found a wide field of practical application, rich material and useful experience in the activities of the All-Russian Zemsky Union and other public organisations. The business of organising aid to millions of refugees — to whole nations — became a school of practical socialism. Then the activity of public organisations spread to the greatest part of the population. It was their fruitful activity that created our food organisations and developed the initial technique of supplying and distributing foodstuffs.

-The Old and New

I thought his accusation specifically of the way authoritarian organization undermined the Russian army&#39;s capacity to fight was interesting too. Reminiscent of Bakunin, who theorized that authority is caustic to expertise (which Alexander Atabekian proposes that he witnessed in practice). I do not know if this is grounded in good history, but his perspective is neat

After the February Revolution, which was to change the whole way of social life in the whole country, it was clear to everyone that the army could not retain its old forms. It, too, had to be renewed. What did the scientifically educated officers, as a professional category, do to point out to the broad layers of the people and the soldiering masses the right ways for renewal? Exactly nothing. We had officers with solid scientific knowledge and combat experience, but we had no officers. There was no purely professional spirit of association among our officers, standing beyond and above political and social beliefs and views. The army was led not by united professional workers, but by disparate officials appointed at the discretion of their superiors from above. This is what ruined the army in the first place.

The truth is that we did not have a purely professional association of officers on the basis of technical knowledge, which would have enjoyed moral authority and would have been able to take into its own hands the work of army renewal from the very beginning. Our officers in the general mass, without initiative, without social outlook, with their thinking squeezed into the deadening framework of routine, were not capable of taking the lead in the reorganisation of the army on new principles, and by habit became inert, waiting for orders from above or clinging to the decaying old forms. From above came the political agitators, driven by the phantoms of the old power. From above came demagogues, chasing themselves after the power that intoxicates man. The results — we have read them in the Brest peace treaty and are reading them in Mirbach’s notes.

From this point of view, any anarchist-revolutionary — for defensive war is essentially an organised revolution against external state oppressors — can only welcome the initiative of “Military Affairs”. It is high time to make military affairs purely professional, to transfer them to the healthy ground of “knowledge and skill” instead of “what do you want?” and “I obey!” before the state power.

Authority can call any accumulation of people an “army,” such as the “Red Army,” but it cannot make it an army.

-The Problem of a Free Army

With regards to &quot;Territoriality and Anarchism&quot; I have mixed feelings, because I think there is an interesting point at the center of the work (given a certain tendency to view humans and environments and &quot;organistic&quot; to each other, although I do not know if that&#39;s a misapplication of Proudhon&#39;s unity-collectivity).

If we look closely at the life of individual animal families and their societies, we will notice that each of them uses a certain place of residence — nest, burrow, den, anthill, beehive — and a relatively limited space of land, i.e. the territory on which it harvests the means for its own existence and for the preservation of the species (offspring). Even migratory birds, and those at different times of the year, return to their former home and old nest. The same is observed in nomadic tribes, which do not wander around the world wherever they see fit, but have their own definite kyshlagi and eylagi (as nomadic Tatars call the places of their winter and summer stay).

The connection with the homeland is so strong in man that even with the modern extraordinary development of communication routes, people are very reluctant to move from their homeland, and then only under the pressure of irresistible economic necessity.

Anarchism has so far put forward the territorial homeland — the commune — as its closest political ideal, because it was easier to imagine and realise a just social order there. But doom inevitably awaits the commune in a surrounding, hostile environment, as happened to Paris in 1871. In order to establish itself, anarchism must develop forms of organisation of large defensible units and then unite other countries more and more closely with its cultural influence. This is the direction in which the revival of the Anarchist International must be sought.

-Territoriality and Anarchism

I&#39;m unsure about his usage of &quot;commune&quot; as a territorial homeland, however now with the additional context of his other work I&#39;m also not sure if he&#39;s using this in any particular national sense. I don&#39;t think he is. It almost seems like the essay is less about territoriality and more concerned with addressing the divide created by WW1 between &quot;anti-militarist&quot; anarchists and anarchists who supported the Entente. His point basically seems to be that neither option makes sense and that when an anarchist &quot;homeland&quot; is created (a &quot;homeland&quot; within his concept being any locality where they live and are organized towards) there&#39;s a coherent basis for attacking -archic forces that want to assimilate it. This seems like an unobjectionable position

There&#39;s some other things of his I haven&#39;t read, and I will now. I feel comfortable keeping his work in my back pocket as a &quot;starting point&quot; for most people, as much of this seems pure anarchism and not strictly anarcho-communism. His collection of ideas seems like ittouches a lot of important bases and does it in an easily readable way

Two last quotes that seem to wrap it up

Theoretical anarchism is a science; its practice must become an applied science.

You have to act to organize. Action, constant action — this is the only way to organization.


I've searched everywhere online for a good quality outdoor ancom flag, but I haven't been able to find anywhere that currently sells one.

Does anybody know where I can get a good hand-sewn anarcho communist flag for outdoor use?

I&#39;ve searched everywhere online for a good quality outdoor ancom flag, but I haven&#39;t been able to find anywhere that currently sells one.


Does anyone here know where I can find other radical anarchists like myself? Even just a nod in the right direction would be helpful.

Looking For Friends


Vive l’anarchie


What is Abolition? Everything you need to know about the global liberation project of abolition.


The Kronstadt Rebellion by Badmouse (Yes, that Badmouse)

<iframe width="356" height="200" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/cujXvT1ZSq8?feature=oembed&enablejsapi=1" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen title="The Kronstadt Revolt | ML Myths 3"></iframe>

The Kronstadt Revolt | ML Myths 3

The Kronstadt Revolt | ML Myths 3


Good Guys with Guns: Why the left should arm itself [2020]


<iframe width="356" height="200" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/wUaCz28bm18?feature=oembed&enablejsapi=1" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen title="Moon Walker - Monopoly Money (Official Music Video) | New Rock Song 2025"></iframe>


Constellation 2025 Presents…

Constellation 2025 Presents…


<iframe width="356" height="200" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/CNI12ak1mmI?feature=oembed&enablejsapi=1" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen title="Yanis Varoufakis Meets David Wengrow | A New History of Humanity"></iframe>


If anyone's watching the inauguration, I did a writeup of more productive thing to do with your time: https://debatemebro.substack.com/p/10-things-to-do-tomorrow-if-youre. Still, I'm feeling so full of existential dread about all this. Does anyone feel the same?

Inauguration Angst

If anyone&#39;s watching the inauguration, I did a writeup of more productive thing to do with your time: https://debatemebro.substack.com/p/10-things-to-do-tomorrow-if-youre. Still, I&#39;m feeling so full of existential dread about all this. Does anyone feel the same?


Can we consider the MIT license as an “anarchist” license nowadays. I consider the GNU license as a kind of anarchist but I want to know what you think about the MIT license.

Thank you.

MIT license


 Weekly Discussion Thread for Radical Gender Non Conforming People

*Radical GNC people can talk about whatever they want in here. Suggestions; chill & relax, gender hegemony, queer theory, news and current events, books, entertainment*

People who do not identify as gender nonconforming are asked not to post in Radical GNC threads.

Radical Gender Non Conforming Saturday

Weekly Discussion Thread for Radical Gender Non Conforming People

Radical GNC people can talk about whatever they want in here. Suggestions; chill &amp; relax, gender hegemony, queer theory, news and current events, books, entertainment

People who do not identify as gender nonconforming are asked not to post in Radical GNC threads.


Anyone else ever listen to Erik Petersen or any of his bands(Mischeif Brew/The Orphans) he was a heavy inspirational a nd heavily influential to me, really let me not feel to alone in my ideas, mmade me feel revolution is possible and more into Anarchism in a genuine away. he lived the music he wrote, he was someone who was what their art was, not someone that sang about Anarchism because it is cool, but someone who sang for a revolution, from a genuine prospective of an Anarchist. I remember meeting him in Philly 11 years ago and how genuine he was, after doing his set, he knew back out and kicked it with us crusties, and shared some homemade wine and stories. Told us how to make a certain thing that goes boom boom. He definitely walked the walk, and was a genuine person, that set an example of a true Anarchist., really sucks he left us before his time..I highly recommend his music if you never heard it.[one of many of the songs he wrote](https://youtube.com/watch?v=pqDzAqPWYAo)

R.I.P Erik, your memory wil be honored.

Erik Petersen

Anyone else ever listen to Erik Petersen or any of his bands(Mischeif Brew/The Orphans) he was a heavy inspirational a nd heavily influential to me, really let me not feel to alone in my ideas, mmade me feel revolution is possible and more into Anarchism in a genuine away. he lived the music he wrote, he was someone who was what their art was, not someone that sang about Anarchism because it is cool, but someone who sang for a revolution, from a genuine prospective of an Anarchist. I remember meeting him in Philly 11 years ago and how genuine he was, after doing his set, he knew back out and kicked it with us crusties, and shared some homemade wine and stories. Told us how to make a certain thing that goes boom boom. He definitely walked the walk, and was a genuine person, that set an example of a true Anarchist., really sucks he left us before his time..I highly recommend his music if you never heard it.one of many of the songs he wrote

R.I.P Erik, your memory wil be honored.


The adjuster


Nate Lindell fighting for prisoner rights and safety. Contact info at the end of short message

<iframe width="356" height="200" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/kkXVPaLnd14?feature=oembed&enablejsapi=1" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen title="Wisconsin Prisoner Open Records and Social Media Cases"></iframe>


I am blind. Some things I would like to see are homes with Braille and accessible kitchen appliances.

Are there any other anarchists here who are disabled? If we were to build an ADA accessible community off grid, what kinds of things would you like to see?


Trump plans large immigration raid in Chicago on Tuesday – report


I just had a potentially brilliant idea, though I would need some help with the finer details.

What if we strapped chatGPT to an army of bots and then ordered them to engage with every right wing person they could find with deep canvassing?

I imagine if we had enough bots we could at least save a few people, but I am uncertain of the logistics. What would be needed for such an operation?

Praxis idea: deradicalizing trollfarm


Thomas Spence (1750 – 1814) was an English Radical and advocate of the common ownership of land and a democratic equality of the sexes


No face No Case

No face No Case


As an anarhist my self, i have read plenty of books from bakunin and kropotkin to bonano. And i can see multiple reference at anarchism as liberterian or stateless socialism. If we keep an eye in anarchist theory, utopia and history, but when it comes in our modern days and in our ''modern actions'', i think we kind broke the window of socialism. I would be interested to hear your opinions about this topic my comrades.

ARE ''MODERN'' ANARCHISTS ACTUALLY SOCIALISTS?

As an anarhist my self, i have read plenty of books from bakunin and kropotkin to bonano. And i can see multiple reference at anarchism as liberterian or stateless socialism. If we keep an eye in anarchist theory, utopia and history, but when it comes in our modern days and in our &#39;&#39;modern actions&#39;&#39;, i think we kind broke the window of socialism. I would be interested to hear your opinions about this topic my comrades.


https://www.reddit.com/r/Anarchism/s/QbXFufJC2R

Hi so first off this is a follow-up to the post I already made on here. Second, this is mostly just to bring in discussions and talk and stuff. I'm not trying to change the world with a Reddit post.

So if you don't know about the FreeLM sub I think at first I was feeling like it was unfair and I think in some ways while I do find that it's somewhat unfair I think I didn't remember at the time what happens when a revolutionary person (and I'm not saying or not saying LM is politically revolutionary) that they're real politics become watered down. We see this with MLK for example, he's not seen as a black socialist, he's seen as the guy that made a speech one time about having a dream and that's all he is for many people. My mom who's a trump supporter seems to think that he would have been a conservative. In some ways I think that Tort got a better position than most. I mean they did get a Wikipedia page hehe. Whatever that even means for some people but my point is is that they were well known enough to hit somewhat mainstream eyes. If you type in their name on Reddit you'll see that a few communities were talking about them. I was talking to someone who is from Puerto Rico and is currently living on the mainland and he says that he heard of Tort as well although at the time they didn't really know the details of the situation. I think at the time I wanted Tort to get more attention but now I realize that that's not always the good thing because not all attention is good attention. Especially when it's a weird parasocial relationship attention where all of your baby pictures are posted stuff even when there is so far no evidence LM is guilty and the nature and conclusion of the trial does not prove without a shadow of a doubt. It just means that he is either labeled guilty or not guilty by the courts. Innocent people do get charged sometimes. It kind of reminds me of the true crime community where you have the people who are trying to treat it very seriously and be like sort of amateur detectives and tried to actually come to somewhat logical conclusions from the information that they have and then the people who post flower crowns of the shooters.

Again I'm not trying to move mountains with a Reddit post, more just curious about what other people might say in creating a sort of interesting discussion.

Especially in the topics of the liberalization of radical figures, parasocial relationships with people who are incarcerated, who are in court, or even just people who have gone down in history as doing something horrible. And also sort of the nature of privacy when you are someone who is seen as a martyr. Like I almost can't help but feel like there might be some sort of feeling of entitlement or something as if another person's entire life or history is just public domain now that person is essentially a public figure Martyr.

[follow up] I am glad Tortuguita isn't getting as much attention as LM, unlike what I originally thought

https://www.reddit.com/r/Anarchism/s/QbXFufJC2R

Hi so first off this is a follow-up to the post I already made on here. Second, this is mostly just to bring in discussions and talk and stuff. I&#39;m not trying to change the world with a Reddit post.

So if you don&#39;t know about the FreeLM sub I think at first I was feeling like it was unfair and I think in some ways while I do find that it&#39;s somewhat unfair I think I didn&#39;t remember at the time what happens when a revolutionary person (and I&#39;m not saying or not saying LM is politically revolutionary) that they&#39;re real politics become watered down. We see this with MLK for example, he&#39;s not seen as a black socialist, he&#39;s seen as the guy that made a speech one time about having a dream and that&#39;s all he is for many people. My mom who&#39;s a trump supporter seems to think that he would have been a conservative. In some ways I think that Tort got a better position than most. I mean they did get a Wikipedia page hehe. Whatever that even means for some people but my point is is that they were well known enough to hit somewhat mainstream eyes. If you type in their name on Reddit you&#39;ll see that a few communities were talking about them. I was talking to someone who is from Puerto Rico and is currently living on the mainland and he says that he heard of Tort as well although at the time they didn&#39;t really know the details of the situation. I think at the time I wanted Tort to get more attention but now I realize that that&#39;s not always the good thing because not all attention is good attention. Especially when it&#39;s a weird parasocial relationship attention where all of your baby pictures are posted stuff even when there is so far no evidence LM is guilty and the nature and conclusion of the trial does not prove without a shadow of a doubt. It just means that he is either labeled guilty or not guilty by the courts. Innocent people do get charged sometimes. It kind of reminds me of the true crime community where you have the people who are trying to treat it very seriously and be like sort of amateur detectives and tried to actually come to somewhat logical conclusions from the information that they have and then the people who post flower crowns of the shooters.

Again I&#39;m not trying to move mountains with a Reddit post, more just curious about what other people might say in creating a sort of interesting discussion.

Especially in the topics of the liberalization of radical figures, parasocial relationships with people who are incarcerated, who are in court, or even just people who have gone down in history as doing something horrible. And also sort of the nature of privacy when you are someone who is seen as a martyr. Like I almost can&#39;t help but feel like there might be some sort of feeling of entitlement or something as if another person&#39;s entire life or history is just public domain now that person is essentially a public figure Martyr.


Today, an anarchist died in North Korea. Pak Yŏl, as well as his wife Kaneko Fumiko, was a nihilistic anarchist; they wrote articles  denouncing Japanese rule of Korea as "oppression". Though Kaneko died in Japanese prison and Pak was abducted to North Korea and died later, their spirits still live.


Friday Free Talk


Anarchist Spain Video i made

<iframe width="356" height="200" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/d9uTpxZ-5rI?feature=oembed&enablejsapi=1" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen title="A las Barricadas - Spanish Anarchist Music"></iframe>


There is a project I have been working on for some time now that has humanitarian and educational components around decolonized global cooperation and engagement with culture. I know there are issues with the Non-Profit Complex in the US - yet initially decided to go that route for this project to access funding. My other consideration was an official association in France (I have ties to both countries).

A friend who was at some point tightly woven into several anarchist communities in Europe who knows I am aligned with anarchist philosophy, yet not really in the network suggested (which I knew but not to this extent) that it would be a terrible idea to pursue a nonprofit startup in the US right now with the incoming administration and everything coming down the pipe. She suggested I take this idea to European anarchist communities. This feels sort of impossible for me to navigate or imagine as I don’t have any real connections to anyone there. I thought I would ask advice of others here. Thanks in advance.

Thoughts on Non-Profit Vs Anarchist networking


i've created a group on [matrix.org](http://matrix.org) and plan to expand it to other social networks for mutual antisystem support. Here, we can help each other and strengthen our efforts in protests against the system. We’ll focus on finances, society, and, in general, ways to live with less oppression from governments and entities. If anyone wants to join, please let me know."

new antisystem group

i&#39;ve created a group on matrix.org and plan to expand it to other social networks for mutual antisystem support. Here, we can help each other and strengthen our efforts in protests against the system. We’ll focus on finances, society, and, in general, ways to live with less oppression from governments and entities. If anyone wants to join, please let me know.&quot;


Making Sense of the Moment from an Anarchist Perspective - 2025 Conjunctural Analysis: Crises and Collective Action


Mark Twain's 1882 comedy story *The Prince and the Pauper* was not subtle about it's commentaries on the dangers of a hierarchical system. And the titular characters got a rare privilege. The chance to see the injustices of it from the other side of their windows.

Most adaptations I've seen show some of that, but the moral is mostly altered to "No life is perfect." Which I suppose is a good moral. But in this day and age, that's not enough. I'd love to see a re-telling where the rich person realizes how sheltered their life has been and how blind they were to the suffering of the poor, and realizes they and other rich folk have benefitted from this injustice. While the poor person realizes that high society life is stricter then they could have ever imagined, and NOT as sophisticated as they thought.

Then, both team up to topple the system and ensure a truly or at least MASSIVELY more egalitarian society. What do you think? Sound like a good idea?

Do you think someone should do a pro anarchy re-telling of "The Prince and the Pauper"?

Mark Twain&#39;s 1882 comedy story The Prince and the Pauper was not subtle about it&#39;s commentaries on the dangers of a hierarchical system. And the titular characters got a rare privilege. The chance to see the injustices of it from the other side of their windows.

Most adaptations I&#39;ve seen show some of that, but the moral is mostly altered to &quot;No life is perfect.&quot; Which I suppose is a good moral. But in this day and age, that&#39;s not enough. I&#39;d love to see a re-telling where the rich person realizes how sheltered their life has been and how blind they were to the suffering of the poor, and realizes they and other rich folk have benefitted from this injustice. While the poor person realizes that high society life is stricter then they could have ever imagined, and NOT as sophisticated as they thought.

Then, both team up to topple the system and ensure a truly or at least MASSIVELY more egalitarian society. What do you think? Sound like a good idea?


So I've been an anarchist for most of my life, but kind of drifted away in the past couple of years because of:

* Delusion,
* Feeling that it wasn't going to happen ever,
* Internal conflict because I want to pursue a diplomatic career - which is a state job where you literally have to represent a country's interest amongst its peers, which nowadays I'm more or less relaxed in regards of this topic, I mean, I view it as diplomacy itself, it would very much be needed in a post-state, post-capitalist world, but I'm still working on that one (on this note, if someone has any books about known anarchist diplomats or anarchistic views on diplomacy per se, not a commentary on global state of art diplomacy, I'd very much appreciate).

But basically, since I've restarted studying for the diplomat's exam for my country, and inevitably coming across multiple reasons for doomerism across our globe, I kinda spiraled into a negative cycle, trying to foresee a solution within known mechanisms and suddenly, I remembered the impact that anarchism left in my life, both morally and ideologically. I don't know how to explain, but it seems to me that even if you don't believe that anarchism is going to be a reality in our lifetime and hope is running out of fuel, it doesn't matter, that's the most humane stance and I wouldn't have it any other way.

Returning to Anarchism

So I&#39;ve been an anarchist for most of my life, but kind of drifted away in the past couple of years because of:

Delusion,

Feeling that it wasn&#39;t going to happen ever,

Internal conflict because I want to pursue a diplomatic career - which is a state job where you literally have to represent a country&#39;s interest amongst its peers, which nowadays I&#39;m more or less relaxed in regards of this topic, I mean, I view it as diplomacy itself, it would very much be needed in a post-state, post-capitalist world, but I&#39;m still working on that one (on this note, if someone has any books about known anarchist diplomats or anarchistic views on diplomacy per se, not a commentary on global state of art diplomacy, I&#39;d very much appreciate).

But basically, since I&#39;ve restarted studying for the diplomat&#39;s exam for my country, and inevitably coming across multiple reasons for doomerism across our globe, I kinda spiraled into a negative cycle, trying to foresee a solution within known mechanisms and suddenly, I remembered the impact that anarchism left in my life, both morally and ideologically. I don&#39;t know how to explain, but it seems to me that even if you don&#39;t believe that anarchism is going to be a reality in our lifetime and hope is running out of fuel, it doesn&#39;t matter, that&#39;s the most humane stance and I wouldn&#39;t have it any other way.


The Birth of the Anarchist Movement

<iframe width="356" height="200" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/w5c1TWMV7Mg?feature=oembed&enablejsapi=1" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen title="The Birth of the Anarchist Movement"></iframe>

The Birth of the Anarchist Movement

The Birth of the Anarchist Movement


Hi comrades,
I have to do a schoolwork about a political topic from 1900 till 2000 and I wanted to talk about EZLN but we can only talk about Europe, are there similar things in Europe?

Movements like EZLN in Europe.


The Consolidation of Oligarchy


Israel, Hamas reach ceasefire deal to end 15 months of war in Gaza


I’ve made [**a list of books**](https://puffy-shadow-0bf.notion.site/1824435ef18480e8889ed49af4bd5f65), 90% of which are related to anarchism or to anti-capitalist and anti-authoritarian discourse in general. I wanted to structurize different suggestions and lists I’ve made browsing mostly through Goodreads and Reddit.

Since the “what to read” post are so popular both here and in r/Anarchy101 decided to post it here. I did not include lots of more obvious stuff, like David Graeber of James C or household names, like Proudhon, Malatesta, as well as Russian anarchists such as Bakunin and Kropotkin.

Feel free to comment with notable omissions or, if you’ve read something from the list and enjoyed (or not!)

50 plus books to read -- a radical book list

I’ve made a list of books, 90% of which are related to anarchism or to anti-capitalist and anti-authoritarian discourse in general. I wanted to structurize different suggestions and lists I’ve made browsing mostly through Goodreads and Reddit.

Since the “what to read” post are so popular both here and in r/Anarchy101 decided to post it here. I did not include lots of more obvious stuff, like David Graeber of James C or household names, like Proudhon, Malatesta, as well as Russian anarchists such as Bakunin and Kropotkin.

Feel free to comment with notable omissions or, if you’ve read something from the list and enjoyed (or not!)


This august, I've started a anarchist zine distro/mutual aid collective here in İstanbul. I'm thinking on beginning on organising mutual aid networks by distributing food to people who live in the more ghetto side of the city.

Does anyone have any recomendation for foods that are easy to make and transfer? Cooking should be kept to a minimum + I would prefer vegan/vegetarian recipes but anything will go for now at least. I'm also wondering if anyone here is from the same city as I am and willing to help.

What's the best/most portable food for getting started with mutual aid?

This august, I&#39;ve started a anarchist zine distro/mutual aid collective here in İstanbul. I&#39;m thinking on beginning on organising mutual aid networks by distributing food to people who live in the more ghetto side of the city.

Does anyone have any recomendation for foods that are easy to make and transfer? Cooking should be kept to a minimum + I would prefer vegan/vegetarian recipes but anything will go for now at least. I&#39;m also wondering if anyone here is from the same city as I am and willing to help.


Hi everyone,
I’m super interested in learning more about anarchism and would love to connect with experienced anarchists for discussions. Are there any Discord servers, forums, or other online spaces you’d recommend?

Additionally, does anyone know if there are anarchist meetups or events in Germany, specifically in Bavaria? I’d love to meet like-minded people in person too.

Looking for Anarchist Communities and Advice


Weekly Discussion Thread for Black, Indigenous, People of Color

*Radical bipoc can talk about whatever they want in here. Suggestions; chill & relax, radical people of color, Black/Indigenous/POC anarchism, news and current events, books, entertainment*

Non BIPOC people are asked not to post in Radical BIPOC Thursday threads.

Radical BIPOC Thursday

Weekly Discussion Thread for Black, Indigenous, People of Color

Radical bipoc can talk about whatever they want in here. Suggestions; chill &amp; relax, radical people of color, Black/Indigenous/POC anarchism, news and current events, books, entertainment

Non BIPOC people are asked not to post in Radical BIPOC Thursday threads.


I guess the ability to do stuff besides having a political view is a pretty good way to feel there’s something being done about our societies’ problems.

But, besides that, being conscious and struggling with the status of our world can take a toll in our mental health. And, I guess we all want to be emotionally and mentally ok. First because it feels okay to be okay, and second because if we despair the status quo wins.

Oppressive systems work because we are too overwhelmed to do something. And that’s something I talked about with my therapist: I want to feel good but not be blind of my surroundings’ issues. So, what’s some advice of you on this matter?

How do you keep sane at the same time of being actively anarchist/leftist


I am from colombia and here is pretty difficult to find this kind of groups, I'm really interested in helping my local community but I don't see myself in the capacity of creating my own group, anyone knows of a way to find these groups?

How do I find anarchist communities in Latin America?

I am from colombia and here is pretty difficult to find this kind of groups, I&#39;m really interested in helping my local community but I don&#39;t see myself in the capacity of creating my own group, anyone knows of a way to find these groups?


In honor of TikTok possibly being no more in the states, I decided to freshen up my social media presence and make a new profile picture / thumbnail image so my tt friends could find me elsewhere. I’m excited about how it turned out and figured it would be appreciated here

I am obsessed with my new profile picture


I am really interested to learn more about rojava and anarchist and anti authoritarian teams that are participating there. I really want to learn more about how they move how and how long they are training and also how much they are fighting too. I am more interested in a specifiec team called R.U.I.S. An anarchist fighting organization from greece (where i live) who fight in rojava by anarchists volunteers. But i would be really open to learn for more teams and especially the general histiry and informations about the war in rojava and as a result in the whole Syria. I would be open to check out some documentaries or interviews the our comrades that my have a knowledge about the whole topic. Also some book would be a really great suggestion (if they exist). Now i undesrtand that those information might not be so easy to write so obvisously in tgis community that anyone can come and watch so if someone can answer at my dm or any other way the think they are safe feel free to tell me. Those information are not going to be reavealed anywhere. Thank you for your time and i am hoping i can help this community with some informations in the future if it it acceptable and i have the chance.

Question about rojava


Weekly Discussion Thread for Radical Women

*Radical women can talk about whatever they want in here. Suggestions; chill & relax, radical trans women, anarchafeminism, news and current events, books, entertainment*

Men are asked not to post in Radical Women Wednesday threads.

Radical Women Wednesday

Weekly Discussion Thread for Radical Women

Radical women can talk about whatever they want in here. Suggestions; chill &amp; relax, radical trans women, anarchafeminism, news and current events, books, entertainment

Men are asked not to post in Radical Women Wednesday threads.