daniel doesn’t think we’ll like this, so we must read and enjoy tearing it to pieces? or… not?
not sure if it is supposed to be the first article or the second, but neither is very long. and both are good.
thanks to daniel’s search-fu, here is the vampire squid reading cosmo was extolling. this reading was originally introduced to me by a previous study group philosophy-head, sam, who was ahead of his time.
there were two readings discussed last night. the first link that got to me is this one on musical improv and anarchist organization (it’s also shorter to read), so it’s for next week.
i will post the link to vampire squids here too if/when i get it, so that people can get a head start on reading it if they want to.
we’ll be reading preliminary notes on modes of reproduction, a piece from Baedan #1, among other worthy publications (that are harder to find).
and we’re on the search for good anarcha-feminist writings on issues with identity, so if you have thoughts on this, hook us up.
this week we’re reading no selves to abolish, published in hostis 2, and the proposal for next week is to read an as yet undetermined article by wilderson. if you have suggestions for wilderson, you can comment here (helpful if it’s available online). (the group has already read a couple of interviews with him, so maybe something new?)
we’re reading the continuing appeal again, this time with a specific focus on what perlman has to say about the differences and connections between nations and states, both in terms of territory, and in terms of cultural and/or ethnic autonomy. if you’ve done any reading on this topic, you can link them in the comments here, and we can do some supplemental reading too (for those who have time).
(not deep, and unclearly cited, but this link is sort of fun http://listverse.com/2016/06/29/10-instances-of-anarchist-societies-that-actually-worked/)
korvin rejects adding their own link, so here it is
“for mainstream liberals, but asks some interesting questions”
(10/10) we will look into this article by noel ignatiev (significant for starting race traitor, an interesting take on fighting racist behavior and expectations by white people). this piece is about redneck revolt, among other things. worth talking about anyway.
mark bray on antifa. we’d rather read anarchists writing on antifa, but those will take longer to find, apparently. so for now, here’s a piece by bray, and here’s a review of his book from the new york times.
some questions are 1. what are the underlying premises of antifa (two mentioned already are a. no platform, and b. left unity. populism is also in there)… and 2. what are the foundations of today’s antifa (assuming it’s different from anti-fascist activity in previous decades). 3. the question of free speech (antifa is anti-free speech, which is a difference from most liberal, populist tendencies. how does that change an anarchist response to antifa, or does it?)…
the person who is writing this post thinks of antifa as not just antifascist action and belief, but as a body of organizing practices and principles. but that is probably worth questioning also. probably people’s experiences with this will vary.
and another link with an extensive debate on no-platforming as a demand (for those who have the time)…
perhaps next week (10/10) we will look into this article by noel ignatiev (significant for starting race traitor, an interesting take on fighting racist behavior and expectations by white people). this piece is about redneck revolt, among other things. worth talking about anyway.