Add new comment

"But if you agree that that’s who we’re talking to on this site (mostly NA & Euro @‘s) & that neocolonialism was always a false solution & that if getting rid of these neocolonial states requires an anarchist response, then what are steps can we take to help from our limited positions that aren’t totally shitty?"

Obvious to me (at least on paper... often less obvious in the real conditions, for sure) that it's about "land back". Which means, occupy the land and live on it in a way that negates property. If you buy it legally at least make sure it'll go public domain in some way, like through a trust, or a "religious group" status.

This is my biggest criticism of the "Bellamy crowd", not so much the assumption they might be Right liberatarians with racist tendencies. That they contribute nothing to this green anarchy project if they advocate private property of land. Maybe it's profitable for them... but then what? Same old story?

Many rich people who went the eco-sustainable way got bigger badder projects already. Even David Mayer de Rothschild has been running one or two private eco-communities in Aotearoa, and no doubt they're successful at their game. That's just a greener type of neocolonialism that is often found to be also filled with racists in the US at least.

If you cancel property that cuts off a huge portion of your monetary needs from the start. I don't think it takes a genius to get that. Operational costs for your eco-farm can be backed by several sources that aren't nearly as costly as buying a land will be, so why make it more complicated due to following the dominant legalist imperatives when you can just find an appropriate place (or area) where to develop an eco-community, then go the full ZAD FTW way!?

I write a lot on these matters all the time and get little response. I just hope some people compute that.

The fact a path is not *there* is only due to the fact not enough people walked it before. You gotta walk the path to make it exist!