As anarchists, the question becomes: How do we sell the idea of a stateless society to not just statists, but feminists?The truth is, as many of us might know, anarchism is already essentially feminist, with its central aim being to abolish hierarchy and inequality. We cannot perpetuate a patriarchal society in free and cooperative market-based communities because it is the case that the state does nothing but welcome institutionalized violence by demonstrating itself as an apparatus that acts as a parasite upon its constituency. Historical perspective presents that it is only the case that nation-states are capable of a mass subjugation upon a class of people while consensual societies demonstrate themselves as solely built upon a voluntary doctrine.
As we grow our student chapters, my advice to fellow student anarchists and libertarians is simply the notice that many of us might want to consider placing convincing effort forward on voicing our sympathy with other students who exhibit a concerning ideological program such as feminism. I believe a job of ours should be to greatly assert anarchism’s inherent truth and present counter arguments to feminists who offer a variety of solutions to male authoritarianism, but side with relating the struggle of women with laws and regulations created and enforced by a male dominated state. Patriarchy and patriotism are inseparable with the nation-state is the argument of the anti-authoritarian feminist. As Carol Moore put in her manifesto, patriarchy and patriotism are “two sides of the same authoritarian coin. Patriarchy is the ideology that males should rule. Patriotism is the worship of male-dominated states.”
As revolutionaries opposed to centralized power, it should be no wonder that male values are held as superior in the world arena of political debate – such bureaucracies are based off male dominance. This isn’t the sole evidence we call for abolishing Leviathan. We call for state abolition because violence, monopoly, taxation, exploitation, surveillance, war, and “borders”, have no place in mature, cooperative, lawfully conscientious societies.
We must take on building better institutions and more worthwhile grassroots organizations than those which are obedient to the nature of the state. We must not only side with those of progressive flavor, like mainstream feminists, in aiding their causes but inform them that the nation-state is the epitome of concentrated male violence. It is the anarchist’s argument that voting for political-betters fails to properly represent the emancipatory imagination. We must argue that voting is not an act of free people and not the route toward liberty, no matter if it is in the process of turning a red state like Texas blue. While such a route may create gradual change for the oppressed, this is only trimming the branches of a fundamentally virulent structure.
We must take on the model of Against Equality, the online publishing collective focused on critiquing mainstream gay and lesbian politics. As queer thinkers, they are committed to challenging the centrality of equality rhetoric and by doing so, openly suggesting the need to engineer social safe havens that provide the most for self-governing individuals while sponsoring the suggestion of mutual aid through these engineered intermediaries.
Rather than siding with the state, which in turn legitimizes its coercive actions and begs to aspire to be as tall and male-dominating as something like the Washington Monument, we should suggest to feminists an increase in love and respect, expanded choices for familial design, and an end to political oppression while desiring the termination of male-dominated establishments. Anti-authoritarian women and men, anarchists, libertarians, and decentralists must come together against the cruelest patriarchal institution, the state, and grasp these proposals and then act on them. Speaking as a radical feminist, I believe it is in the interest of those who will call themselves “anarchists” to take up this proposal and collaborate with who we can in creating equitable outcomes.
Strange events get even stranger.
This has been up at C4SS for a few days now, but I just realized we forgot to put it up here as well. More info from James Tuttle on the far-right copyright attack.
Welcome back.
Now more than ever.
If you’ve tried to check either this site (or the Center for a Stateless Society), you probably noticed that it was offline.
To catch everyone up to speed who hasn’t already heard, we were recently the victims of a far-right copyright attack. If you look at the post immediately beneath this one, you’ll see that we had to formally and forcefully disassociate ourselves from a self-proclaimed S4SS group in Belgium dominated by racist, Islamophobic, anti-immigrant, and otherwise generally bigoted thugs. In that post (which you should read now if you haven’t already), we also chose to include screenshots of the kind of discourse going on in their public facebook group, as a way to show why we were disassociating from them.
That’s when they decided to prove our point even more. After finding both S4SS.org and C4SS.org down, we discovered that the cause was a copyright claim by Olivier Janssens (who was quoted in that post that you should read). Yes, he seriously filed a copyright claim over facebook screenshots. At that point, Bluehost (who
There’s a lot to say about this, and I don’t have the time necessary to say all of it right now. Luckily, most of it has already been said by C4SS contributors James Tuttle, Trevor Hultner, Charles W. Johnson, Roderick Long, and Nathan Goodman (whose thoughts on this whole ordeal will be posted here soon), along with Reason Magazine’s Jesse Walker.
I just want to make two quick points:
1. Ironically, Janssens’s copyright attack was a response to an action we took in the way that we took it specifically because of how much we oppose intellectual property.
Notice that in the post that started all of this, we did not demand that the UGent League of Angry White Men stop referring to themselves as “S4SS Ugent” or “University of Ghent Students for a Stateless Society.” We simply made public that we do not consider ourselves associated with them in any way whatsoever, and that we emphatically reject their white supremacist ideas.
This is because as much as I would like to demand that they stop calling themselves by those names, we have no moral right to claim title over any non-scarce resource, including the words “S4SS” and “Students for a Stateless Society.” If they chose to use what we at the University of Oklahoma have been using as something of a logo, we also couldn’t stop them. As anarchists, we do not use violence to suppress non-invasive actions. As people who actually believe in individual liberty, we can only publicly disassociate, denounce, shame, and otherwise peacefully condemn them as loudly as we possibly can, in order to make clear that their using our imagery doesn’t make them us.
By contrast, the UGent League of Angry White Men have decided to use a threat of State violence to protect themselves from the kind of responsibility that comes along with the free society they’ve previously claimed to want. This makes the point behind the title of our original post, “UGent S4SS Not Anarchists (Or Comrades)” even more true.
Which leads me to the second point,
2. Never trust racists (or bigots of any kind).
Some segments of the libertarian movement (unfortunately, this even includes some genuinely radical libertarians who I otherwise have a strong affinity for) have in the past made apologies for racists, or downplayed the significance of the issue. Wanting to to focus on the State and its crimes, they have turned a blind eye to forms of social oppression that while not literally aggressive, still cause very real harm to people on a daily basis. Wanting to form as big of a “tent” as possible, they’ve welcomed in people who might not advocate aggression, but whose visions of a free society go entirely against the spirit that makes most people want it.
What Janssens and his group at the University of Ghent have now shown is how interconnected opposing social oppression and opposing State aggression really are. When you allow yourself to think of some people as less than human, you open the door to ignoring people’s basic human dignity.
Anarchism (and libertarianism more generally, for that matter) and bigotry are at enemies. As long as we are anarchists, and as long as we are libertarians, we will push back against those who use our names in the service of oppression.
S4SS’ UGent Not Anarchists (or Comrades)
From the inception of Students for a Stateless Society we have strived to provide a space to learn about liberty and engage in projects to further its cause. We seek to provide a networked structure that will allow for maximum autonomy of our chapters while fostering maximum inter/intra-chapter participation, communication and coordination. Although we do not ‘own’ the S4SS ‘trademark’ we feel it is necessary to emphasize that we do decide for ourselves which individuals, groups and chapters we recognize as being part of our network.
For the last few months we have been observing a rapid change of subject and tone in the discussions held at the facebook group of the S4SS chapter in Belgium; Students for a Stateless Society UGent. The atmosphere present in that group is becoming increasingly hostile towards fellow liberty-advocates, liberty-oriented organizations, and –most clearly- those of the Islamic faith. In accordance with our organizational orientation which states:
“3. S4SS spaces are safe and valued spaces. We are dedicated to not only identifying agents of aggression, but dissolving institutions of oppression.”
We feel S4SS U-gent is not representing this orientation in their structure or discussions. In fact we feel they are actively promoting oppression of Muslim minorities, as evidenced by the following facebook-conversations:
Piece 1: https://www.facebook.com/groups/452955004728164/permalink/637332409623755/
Everaert: According to Lode Cossaer and his fellow Trotskyists it is “redundant to talk about the problems in the Arab world” and “we should focus ourselves on signs of hope.” I propose sending him on a one way trip to Syria. He can go and ignore the bullets and beheadings (they’re redundant anyway), and look for hope. Surely he won’t return. That kid won’t even survive reality.
Arnaert: Cossaer denies reality? Behold the most important attitude of the left!
Everaert: Reality is redundant, so not relevant and pointless. Bleri Lleshi = Lode Cossaer (ed. Bleri Lleshi is a leftist Belgian philosopher, documentary filmmaker and political scientist who focuses on things like identity, equality and neo-liberalism)
Janssens: It would be relevant enough if you know that the SPA/PS (Leftist political parties in Belgium) are growing in power because of the muslims, and that the Arab world is helping them accomplish this. Unless his hope is is ‘not being beheaded in 20 years because he is a Christian’.
Verdyck: He has no capital and his ambition to work for the government all his life.
Xavier Everaert, Brecht Arnaert, Olivier Janssens and Yannick Verdyck share very islamophobic viewpoints as visible from the above conversation. Let us be clear; We do not believe the Muslim world is helping leftist political parties gain power. Muslims are individuals with their own thoughts, their actions and political beliefs are not a result of their skin color or belief in a certain deity. Additionally:
Piece 2: https://www.facebook.com/groups/452955004728164/permalink/636924376331225/
In response to a story involving a recommendation to the government to change public holidays to involve more multi-cultural festivities instead of just Christian ones.(http://m.gva.be/nieuws/binnenland/aid988952/pasen-hemelvaartsdag-en-allerheiligen-geen-wettelijke-feestdagen-meer.aspx) A selection of comments has been translated.
Janssens: Men, it’s time for revolution
Kint: ‘recommendation’
Jacobs: Funny how the result of ‘inter-cultural dialogue’ always comes down to giving Muslims more advantages while Catholics get doused in shit every day by our regime’s media.
Janssens: Enough is enough.
Arnaert: I don’t think they’re taking it far enough. I think western names like John, Peter and Paul are quite upsetting as well.
Verdyck: And of course, everyone who thinks this will cause trouble between original-Belgians and muslims is obviously a xenophobe.
Everaert: Guns. Guns to kill all those sand-niggers and their servants like Lode Cossaer, just like the animals they are.
Verdyck: I have never been able to find the difference between Mein Kampf and the Koran, but according to Lode Cossaer and Joelle Milquet there is definitely a difference. Hitler wrote Mein Kampf in German, that xenophobic nationalist!
Let us highlight Everaert’s comment: “Guns. Guns to kill all those sand-niggers and their servants like Lode Cossaer, just like the animals they are.” Do we really need say more? In no way can you call this critical of religion. This is pure racism. S4SS is supposed to provide safe spaces for students of all sorts, including individuals with minority religious and ethnic backgrounds. In addition this comment is a threat to initiate violence against peaceful people; S4SS should not associate itself with people who make threats to the life and liberty of others. If this wasn’t enough, here is more:
Piece 3: https://www.facebook.com/groups/452955004728164/permalink/628664343823895/
Janssens: HHH (ed. Hans Herman Hoppe) has the balls to say that, thanks to our welfare state, our genetic pool is fucked. Exactly my thoughts. The only reason the Muslim parasite can breed at a 10 times faster pace than us. Totally love this guy.
Kint: Truefax. A virus can’t survive without a host.
And finally:
Piece 4: https://www.facebook.com/groups/452955004728164/permalink/619657114724618/
In response to: http://www.nieuwsblad.be/article/detail.aspx?articleid=dmf20130723_00667877 A selection of comments has been translated.
Kint: My problem is that mohammedan promise 5 times a day that they will chop my head off, and that I have to pay for them to do this.
Kint: Under normal circumstances people like that would be institutionalized, or better yet: deported. Because the kuffar (unbeliever) keeps paying to finance and maintain that fascist death-cult. Stop welfare checks and the problem is solved.
Kint: Mohammedans who do not promise this are not good mohemmedans. The ‘existence’ of the so-called moderate muslim is irrelevant in this discussion. The question is: what side will the moderate muslim take when all hell breaks loose?
Kint: Servititude is the worst. Breivik had the idea.
(ed. Breivik: Anders Behring Breivik http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anders_Behring_Breivik )
Kint: Mohammedans must practice Jihad in multiple ways. One of the techniques is to soothe the Kuffar to sleep by becoming ‘moderate’ or becoming your friend.
Everaert: ‘I know friendly muslims, so there is no problem” , how cute.
Everaert: I know how you will defend yourself. You will convert and collaborate and decapitate your mother and father because your moderate friends ask you nicely, just like in Syria.
Kint: Collaborators of islamofascists will be the first targets. The fear has to spread to the other side. http://wiki.artikel20.com/
Kint: Moderate muslims are a fiction created by Mohammed himself. They are the first wave of the Jihad. The anthrax in your carpet. This is where the discussion ends for me, you are in a deep comatose sleep. You won’t care if your head is removed. Insh’allah! (ed. If god wills it!)
Everaert: First point is to get rid of collaborators like you because we have the suspicion that you will pick their side. Just like the liberals have picked the side of the salafists in the middle-east, is there any reason to think why they won’t do that here?
Again, there is no conspiracy of world domination by which ‘the Muslims’ are seeking power. Suggesting that people are automatically part of a plot just because of their religion or ethnic ancestry is racism. Also, posting references to kill-lists set up by racist groups does not qualify S4SS UGent as a safe space, which S4SS chapters should be.
We would like to take the opportunity to point out the continuous hostility towards Lode Cossaer, president of the Murray Rothbard Institute in Belgium. Throughout multiple conversations he has been ridiculed, verbally attacked and his life has been threatened. As S4SS members we feel deeply ashamed that personal attacks like this have happened in a chapter that we consider part of our network. If you’re reading this, Lode, we would like to apologize for not taking action on this at a sooner date. We empathize with the possible fear and under appreciation you feel because of S4SS UGent.
In response to the evidence provided above we have decided to dissociate ourselves with S4SS UGent as well as the members that most prominently voiced racist opinions and threats; Xavier Everaert, Brecht Arnaert, Olivier Janssens, Yannick Verdyck and Peter Kint. We suggest that the members of S4SS UGent who are not part of its racist core to start a different chapter, a safe and valued space, so that the idea of a stateless society may continue to grow in their university and their country.
Finally, we would like to provide the opportunity for anyone else to sign this message with or without additional comments. As a closing statement let us reiterate our orginizational orientation:
The Students for a Stateless Society (S4SS) agree to the following four design principles:
1. “Student” does not mean subservient, submissive, or subordinate. A student is anyone who desires knowledge. A student can be either a teacher or a learner.
2. A stateless society is anarchy. Students have a right to contribute to and have a voice in the institutions they participate or constitute. As anarchists we will actively pursue and support hierarchy dissolving and mutual aid projects. Our time as students is not a time of passivity or mindless discipline, but a time for activity and creativity.
3. S4SS spaces are safe and valued spaces. We are dedicated to not only identifying agents of aggression, but dissolving institutions of oppression.
4. All chapters of S4SS, to be considered active, must have at least one volunteer “point of contact” that can be reached by interested students or encouraging chapters. There is no limit to the number of S4SS chapters that can be on any one campus – swarm and take over!
Becoming a Conscientious Objector to the Culture of War
The other day, members from Oklahoma University and Southern Nazarene University’s S4SS chapters joined a few dozen people in Oklahoma City to protest potential American military intervention in Syria. It was well over a hundred degrees, and there were a few hecklers, but it’s important to show those who oppose this and any other war they’re not alone.
SNU S4SS members at the protest. Multiple hecklers told them to turn the flag around. Photo credit: Trevor Hultner.
One of the common diversions I’ve heard from war-defenders in recent years is that since we don’t have a draft anymore, people who don’t want to fight wars don’t have to. So we shouldn’t worry. Of course, that misses the point – even if I’m not being forced to do it, it is still evil to invade other nations, dropping bombs that we know for certain will cause large amounts of collateral damage. The main thing isn’t just that I don’t want any part of it, but that it shouldn’t be done.
But that got me thinking the other day. While it’s true that the State doesn’t use an army of drafted slaves anymore, we’re still forced to take part in other ways. Since it’s the State doing the killing, we are forced to pay for it. You might not be forced to give your labor in being present on the battlefield, but the product of whatever labor you do end up doing still has to go there.
Imagine the homes, bakeries, playgrounds, hospitals, and whatever else that could have been built had that money stayed with you and been able to go to those projects you think are actually valuable. Instead, our resources are conscripted into the machine of war, which eats your labor and churns out death. There is no conscientious objector status for being a cog in the political economy of war.
And we’re not only forced into making that machine’s fuel, but also into breathing its exhaust — the culture of war. We are forced to watch as war
OU S4SS members exchange information with the Oklahoma Center for Conscience. Photo credit: Trevor Hultner.
pollutes the culture, making so many perfectly peaceful people callous to corpse piles, and teaching them that the greatest honor is in being a part of the process that makes them. We are forced to see a psychological fusion of community and militarism, where saying that murder is wrong is taken to mean you hate your neighbors. Where you are not allowed to love the pond near your house without ignoring the pools of blood we’re forced to pay for. Where you are not allowed to love a school down the street without excusing the incineration of children halfway across the world. There is no conscientious objector status for having to live with the culture of war.
It is important, then, for us to become conscientious objectors of a kind that we can. Not only must we refuse to comply with war ourselves, but we must fully object to it. We must object to the culture of war that’s been forced on us whenever we see it and voice loudly that supporting the institutions that destroy another community has nothing to do with supporting your own – or else we will continue to see people who just want to keep their friends and families safe sacrificed to keep others in danger. We must combat the political economy of war by doing whatever we can to eliminate the power to use other people’s resources against their will – or else we will continue to see the fruits of free exchange stolen, and melted down into bullets and bombs. We must make clear to others why we refuse to participate in wars where the killing of innocents is inevitable, and why they should as well.
Center for a Stateless Society » AN OPEN LETTER TO THE TURKISH PROTESTORS
Center for a Stateless Society » AN OPEN LETTER TO THE TURKISH PROTESTORS.
S4SS and C4SS stand with you! To the Turkish protesters!
Poll says 54% don’t trust the American political system
From RT:
Note: This poll is NOT scientific. But funny still.
Who would you vote for in the US Presidential Election:
16% : Democratic incumbent Barack Obama all the way
11% : Republican challenger Mitt Romney to get America back on track
19% : Any of the third party candidates, left or right
54% : No one! The system is rigged and the election is meaningless
Let’s face it: all we can really do is laugh at this point.
Why aren’t more women anarchists?
James Tuttle at C4SS ponders why this is.
I often think of those two quotes, especially when people ask why there are so few women anarchists and libertarians. The recent anarchist survey came back with 82% of the respondents being men. Libertarian surveys also have lopsided results.
Why?
Drones
From CNN:
Obama has already authorized 283 strikes in Pakistan, six times more than the number during President George W. Bush’s eight years in office, Bergen wrote earlier this month. As a result, the number of estimated deaths from the Obama administration’s drone strikes is more than four times what it was during the Bush administration — somewhere between 1,494 and 2,618.
FBI Confirms They Spy on Anarchists
From RT:
On Thursday, legal documents intended to be cloaked indefinitely were accidently unsealed in US District Court in Seattle for a moment, finally offering a small bit of insight as to why the FBI has been targeting adherents to a specific ideology and intensifying what some have equated to a politically-motivated witch-hunt aimed at anarchists.
The Seattle Times reports that an affidavit dated October 3 was momentarily made available during last week’s court proceedings, revealing to those in attendance that the investigation into Plante and her peers dates back to earlier this year when the FBI first began spying on a group of suspected anarchists they believed were conspiring to commit acts of violence and destruction.