Real Anarchists React to ‘The Anarchists,’ A New Series About Crypto Bros

Real Anarchists React to ‘The Anarchists,’ A New Series About Crypto Bros

From Vice News by Ella Fassler

HBO’s new docuseries explores Anarchapulco, a not-so-utopian den of 'free market' capitalists. Anarchists say their goals couldn’t be more different.

Politicians and media pundits often use the term “anarchists” to conjure images of lawless hooligans causing mindless destruction, warning of a dystopian world that might exist without the rule of law.

In reality, anarchists have been involved in some of the most significant political projects of the last two centuries, whether it’s striking workers winning the eight-hour work day or communities coming together to participate in mutual aid projects. But HBO’s new six-part docuseries, “The Anarchists,” features self-described anarchists of a whole different variety: self-interested capitalists and crypto bros.

Anarchists carrying the torch of the long-standing political tradition are cringing at the series’ portrayal of anarchism as being compatible with capitalism. The series is ultimately a character-driven drama about murder and interpersonal conflicts, not a political documentary focused on ideology. But uncritically using the term anarchist to describe capitalists mystifies actual anarchist politics for the average viewer, they say.

“Their conception of anarchism is just completely and totally divorced from the 175-plus year political history of the anarchist movement,” Cam Pádraig, an anarchist who organizes with the Black Rose Anarchist Federation in the Bay Area, an anarchist socialist organization, told Motherboard. “Anarchism is a cooperative political doctrine critical of both the state and capitalism, and the filmmaker Todd Schramke… makes no attempt at addressing that at all.”

The series follows the growth of, and conflict within, the annual “Anarchapulco” conference in Acapulco, Mexico. Founded by entrepreneur and long-winded YouTuber Jeff Berwick in 2015, Anarchapulco caters to middle-to-upper class mostly white American expats who promote “free market” libertarian capitalism, as theorized by far-right thinkers like Ayn Rand and Murray Rothbard. In their view, governments should be abolished and everything should be privatized. Police officers would be replaced by private security forces, and public schools would become for-profit charter schools.

“The Anarchists” filmmaker Todd Schramke is friendly with Berwick, and has said in the past that he is influenced by public figures like Stefan Molyneux, a white supremacist infamous for amplifying disproven theories of eugenics and “scientific racism.” In addition to more traditional libertarian capitalists, Berwick’s Anarchapulco has more recently become a home for cryptocurrency and “web3” enthusiasts, who are hawking digital assets like NFTs and even trying to, uh, monetize colors.

“It's completely uncritical in a way that I haven't ever seen,” Jen Rogue, another anarchist who organizes with Black Rose in Texas, told Motherboard of the series. “Usually when you see people do documentaries on things that a filmmaker is sympathetic towards, there's usually some vague attempted balance or kind of deeper thinking. It’s just so shallow and propagandistic.”

Of course, the feud has moved online too. 


After the anarchist news organization It’s Going Down critiqued HBO’s misuse of the term “anarchist” and called Berwick an anti-semitic grifter in a barrage of tweets, Berwick responded with a 30-minute YouTube rant in which he claimed his detractors were just “unhappy,” “poor,” and “jealous” of wealthy people and told them to “work on themselves.”

So-called Anarchist capitalists, or “ancaps” as they are sometimes called, have long battled with anti-capitalist anarchists over the use of the term “libertarian” which was historically associated with anti-capitalist anarchist politics as far back as 1858. That is until the 1970s, when laissez faire capitalists in the United States co-opted the term by forming the hyper-individualist Libertarian Party.

Berwick’s conception of libertarianism is clearly of the individualist bent. He chose Acapulco, Mexico as a landing pad for what some attendees call their “tribe” because it “seemed anarchist” to him. “The buses were all private, they race to get you. They got the music,” he says to the camera with a grin in the first episode. “Everyone is drinkin.’ All the girls are sayin’ hi.”

Anarchapulco guests stay in a luxury hotel, worship bitcoin and mingle with others who lament the statist American sheeple and their bloodsucking central banks. They seem to be suburbanites who are understandably bored by, and wish to flee, the mind-numbing grind of American life. Some who decide to stay for the long haul live out their fantasies in mansions together, a power dynamic anti-capitalist anarchists consider colonialist.

“One major thing that immediately stuck out to me, especially in episode one, as they were getting into people's backstories as to how they ended up in Anarchapulco, was this dynamic of expats moving to Mexico, making a village and not really interacting with locals, just straight up being colonizers in every humanly possible way,” Robin Young, an anarchist with Black Rose who lives in Miami, told Motherboard.

“They have little to no interest in or regard for the local population at all, which, in any case, are to be but material resources to further develop settlers' communities,” she continued. “They consider themselves an entitled ‘vanguard’ tasked with developing the ‘land’ of ‘uncharted’ financial freedom as a way to gain social liberties. Acapulco, as part of Mexican territory, is the ‘new’ land where this can be done—not for the sake of this territory, which is regarded as a pure source for resources.”

Berwick claims he’s an anarchist because he doesn’t believe in rulers, and doesn’t think anyone should be a slave. But for anti-capitalist anarchists, capitalism can’t be anarchistic because the economic system relies on rulers—bosses and owners—to coercively extract profits from a laboring class. Anarchists therefore consider “anarchist capitalism” to be oxymoronic.

“One Anarchapulco attendee Larken Rose framed taxes as giving your master the fruits of your labor, when they're expressly capitalists,” Pádraig pointed out. “They ignore the fundamental organization of production that is capitalism which is predicated on your boss extracting the complete value of your work from you. The fruits of your labor are being stolen from you.”

Anarchists of the socialist variety argue for workplaces that are democratically controlled by workers themselves, not bosses or state bureaucrats. Food, water, essential goods and art would be produced and freely shared and distributed in accordance to the needs and desires of people in a community, not the desires and needs of capitalists.

“That obviously, makes us very different from what the so-called libertarians believe,” Pádraig explains, “but it also makes us very different from what the State Socialists believe, because the State Socialists believe that you need to have an economy that is controlled on behalf of the working class through the managers of the state.”

Outside of a workplace context, some anarchists propose building neighborhood assemblies, where issues are debated and discussed face-to-face. Rotating delegates from assemblies could then meet at regional and even global assemblies to relay what was discussed at their local assemblies to the larger group. In such a system, they propose, people would cultivate a free society collectively.

“The ancaps’ idea of freedom is freedom from anybody interfering or talking to or being around them that isn't like, in their cult, or whatever,” said Rogue, the anarchist from Austin. “And to me, my idea of liberty is for everyone in my community to have everything they need to be the best version of themselves.”

Many anarchists are inspired by the Rojava Revolution in North and East Syria, and the Zapatista movement in Chiapas, Mexico. Both are large-scale, stateless anti-capitalist movements building decision-making structures from the bottom up.

“If the documentarian, or if HBO itself, wanted to produce a documentary about anarchists in Mexico, they have a long history they can pull from,” said Pádraig. He pointed to the anarchist-influenced Partido Liberal Mexicano (PLM) that helped spark the Mexican Revolution of 1910. Young, the anarchist from Miami, emphasized the pro-choice Green Wave, which successfully fought for decriminalizing abortion in Mexico.

“You have these histories that exist, you have contemporary anarchists in Mexico, but instead of doing that, instead of focusing a documentary which is ostensibly supposed to be about those groups of people, you are focusing on a niche of expat Americans who are using the power and influence they've accrued to individually change their lives by moving to this place,” said Pádraig. “It’s just totally absurd.”

Anarchists interviewed by Motherboard for this story withheld their real last names, citing concerns for their safety.

There are 24 Comments

Lol! Well, that's what I get for complaining about this shite.

If it's gonna be the ancaps fighting the ansocialists i say let them fight to the last person!

But for real, if this entertainment throws the right ones off the scent all to the better, i say.

the "real anarchists" of Black Rose... smh. i guess it's better than nothing

Seems like they were just better organized and had the connections to be able to become the loudest voice on the topic. Go figure ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

The anarchy that can be an ex-pat in exarcheia is not the real anarchy either.

15:50 here, I was referring to the fact that Black Rose Federation was organized enough to get a story placed in the media around this.

obvs the fuckheads in the documentary are not anarchists.

Problem I see is ansoc groups like BRF have been equally doing their share of bad rep for anarchism for a much longer time. In the same ways as Democrats being problematic standing figures against the Far Right, if any side "wins" this representation struggle, we'll get stuck with an hostile crowd as the shop front for anarchism. The Right faction just being wealthier and more resourceful than the Left counterpart, yet the latter has a much, much bigger, more pervasive and well-grounded presence in IRL milieus and struggles.

The best way is to maintain a blur around what anarchism refers to, so that no agendas can monopolize it to their own profits?

Signed, the Only Real Anarchist ;-)

You’re such a dork At least you admit you care about your “anarchist” “rep”,,,, as perceived by society.

Oh no the Democratics in a country you don’t even live in think incorrect things about your ideology!

Brah.

So what? I seldom admit it to others as a kind of disclaimer... I still yet gotta read some original or even interesting critics from my few detractors. :-(

And I don't care about anarchist rep "as perceived by society". I don't see where you saw that.

What I was saying above is that hostile groups fronting for anarchism can't mean anything good for any Post-Left and antifash, or "pure black" anarchists, i.e. antiauthoritarians. It's about authoritarian posers with agendas taking concrete positions of power or influence, in the name of @. Which might include uuuuu!

Anarchy is not an identity, brah. It don't matter if Elon Musk calls himself an anarchist. You be your dork self and let Elon be his dork self, brah. No need to play "No true anarchist," brah.

Good potatoes always feel so good to eat, brah! Especially well-cooked with curry and oil over a campfire, brah, in some occupied forest. Brah. A great, primal experience of Anticiv Controlled Fire with buddies.

Brah you should submit this to the anarchist library. It's the exact same depth as your last published piece, brah.

I took the precaution to make it accessible to smooth-brained asshats like u, so I thought you'd enjoy it?

An asshat is a belt, brah. It has absolutely nothing to do with campfire potatoes. No need to sugar coat it. Sugar is a killer.

It's over 38 degrees outside. Our potatoes will bake in the ground. The entire village will starve. No cool, brah.

Climate Change is a spook and your mom was gay! *pouts*

The reason a Black Rose person is the featured quote is because they’re a public organization you can find online and they’re willing to talk to the media. That makes it easy for a journalist if they don’t know or don’t want to put more effort than googling into knowing anarchists. But it’s really not a bad article. It pretty effectively shits on this series and everyone involved in it as attempting to ride the attention getting coattails of real movements by association.

It's not just one black rose person, it's three. but yeah, you're right on that point.

the reason Black Rose is an unfortunate choice is only partly because they are willing to speak to the media -- who, despite whatever good faith or good intentions they might have, will always get it wrong about anarchism. another reason is that they are a public outfit interested in recruitment to their membership organization, and so must have a position on every current event imaginable to make themselves feel relevant. another reason is that almost all of the time, their positions on current events are geared toward not frightening the left-liberals who float around the same issues and events.
i'm not saying that a "make total destroy"spokesperson from cluster of affinity groups would have been a better contribution to the skewering of the HBO bullshit, but the timid revolutionism of anarcho-leftists who are afraid to alienate potential supporters and/or members is not exactly the most honest or coherent response to mainstream mistakes.

you know ... I mostly agree with you but as you said, a "make total destroy" spokesperson isn't even possible 99% of the time.

are there any public anarchist orgs that actually exist, answer emails and would meet your criteria for decent representation? even though we don't believe in representation? haha

asking because i've tangled with this problem before. even got my heart broken by a vice journalist one time!

they were all "i'm not like the other journalists baby.." and then BAM! knife in the back! serves me right

Why does an anarchist interviewee need to be part of an organization?

because like ... it's either that or the journalist needs to randomly encounter them in the wild?

they contact you and ask for an interview, so they need to find you somehow

Add new comment