TOTW: Anarchist Influencers

Topic of the Week – One idea that has grown into a whole new monster over the years is that of being an influencer. Often related to being online, an influencer is a media content creator who uses their media platform to influence audience behavior, relationships, and patterns both online and IRL/AFK. If you dare, you could look at the social media platforms of TikTok, Instagram, X, Facebook, and YouTube to get an idea of the plethora of content under the sun these influencers are sharing with the world. This week we’re asking you to like and subscribe, smash the like button, and join the conversation here about anarchist influencers.

The idea of influencers often seems most relevant for younger people and is one major way the youth obtain their news and (dis)information. With that in mind, how have anarchists historically approached this idea of being an influencer across time and space? Do you know of or watch any anarchist influencers? Who are they and what kind of content are they making? Has there been an actual anarchist influencer yet? What kind of anarchist influencer would you like to see in the world? How do anarchists build social capital worthy of the anarchist idea? What annoys you the most about this topic of the week?

Listen to the conversation here!

Comments

Effective Comrade (not verified) Mon, 06/17/2024 - 12:46

We need more and better anarchist influencers to serve as positive role-models by documenting and sharing their prefigurative lifestyles online.

SirEinzige Mon, 06/24/2024 - 07:38

In reply to by Effective Comrade (not verified)

Is what @discourse needs. In other words not a himbo identitarian non-authentic all profilitic retard.

anon (not verified) Mon, 06/17/2024 - 13:50

Seems silly but a good TOTW.

The answer for me is, I don't pay attention to anyone's opinions who isn't involved in action.

Specially if they are a god damn journalist or academic author. It's a shame that these people who are almost always liberals get so much attention.

Historically someone like Bakunin is a good example. Pretty much dedicated his life to causing problems for state and capital. Anything else was besides the point or complimented it.

anon (not verified) Mon, 06/17/2024 - 14:20

The hurricane himself happens to be starting a live call-in show the first week of July...but many of the folx tagged in the above post aren't even around anymore. Dr. Bones admitted sexually assaulted someone, but nah, Z is the devil!

MODS: The other post was accidentally, sorry. My intention is not spamming

anon (not verified) Mon, 06/17/2024 - 17:04

In reply to by anon (not verified)

is this real though? Z if you're out there and can verify that you are actually trying to start a call in show for anarchists, plz confirm. I saw the Anokchan post and ANews forum post about it and emailed, but no response.
thx,
-thecollective_1.8

anon (not verified) Mon, 06/17/2024 - 14:38

I was bored the other week & typed "bolo bolo" into youtube & was surprised to see over 60k people (or bots or whatever) watched a video about that book on this persons' channel called, "Andrewism". I don't really have anything more to add other than it threw me off-guard. First time I heard of Bolo'bolo it was tattooed around this one guys wrists.

anon (not verified) Mon, 06/17/2024 - 14:58

In reply to by anon (not verified)

People want to see this content. That's the ridiculous part about it. People could easily make the right stuff but it's either absolute anarcholiberal nonsense like putting a 15 minute disclaimer on a Bakunin video or way too theoretical and personalized to the point of not attracting many people.

anon (not verified) Mon, 06/17/2024 - 15:01

In reply to by anon (not verified)

Let me be clear too, if you are intending to make anarchist propaganda but give me a speech on why X historical figure was a bad bad man you are not making anarchist propaganda. You are a liberal historian.

anonymous (not verified) Mon, 06/17/2024 - 15:13

In reply to by anon (not verified)

Of course over emphasizing how people (we) don't live up to what and who we want to be is a weak argument and over used.

But it is also true that one gauge of whether someone is sincere or not is how they live.

That question might be worth a totwa itself.

anon (not verified) Mon, 06/17/2024 - 15:41

In reply to by anonymous (not verified)

It's a worthwhile question for sure. Specifically if their action otherwise outweighs certain issues. Anarchists hate dealing with this question and end up sounding like evangelicals when answering it.

anon (not verified) Mon, 06/17/2024 - 16:15

The formalization & normalization of "influencer" as a literal job title for someone who gets people to help companies company is new yes. THe underlying phenomena are not

2020 https://redvoice.news/clout-culture-queer-liberation-and-social-capital…

2017 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQ5MdAjX4NU

also 2017 https://medium.com/@merricatherine/what-is-social-capitalism-c7e01007d0…

There are anarchocelebs, sometimes intentionally so, who have outsized influence on mainstream culture and/or "Radical spaces" compared to others who share their social background or interests. This is a position of relative social power so they can be pretty damaging to liberation even when they aren't trying to be. Trying to figure out who's intentionally Being Bad and who could use their power for good TM can be a pain in the arse

maybe the most straightofrwad inplication of this thing for narchists is that ideas that have power and influence among you all are not necessarily th ebest or truest but may just play well with whatever the anarchocelebs want to do. Maybe this isn't new in the sense that state infiltration also can do things like this but it happens in new ways now. Plus people who come to anarchist adjacent zonez from palces where being an influencer is normal and good and fine might bring new kinds of shit baggage with new consequences

anon (not verified) Tue, 06/18/2024 - 18:57

In reply to by anon (not verified)

merricatherine is a maoist *organizer* and was a secretary for CROW for a good minute
CROW being famous for having a defense contractor as one of their secretaries and aggressively defending Black Hammer and other authoritarian state communist groups
those pieces call for people to "compile *receipts* (or make them up) in order to re-distribute the followers of big accounts to the peoples vanguard"
shits embarrassing and cringe as hell

anon (not verified) Mon, 06/17/2024 - 17:04

I hate everything about everyone. Anarchism is a lack, everyone and everything in this world is lacking it. People who talk about it just point to the lack. No one is embodying or practicing anything that comes close to it. Anarchist influencers as a concept is a sham.

cyberdandy Mon, 06/17/2024 - 17:07

This is an interesting topic if I say so myself...

I think "influence" comes up in anarchist ideas of "what is to be done?" a lot throughout history. If you take the word loosely, it's basically how Propaganda by the Deed is supposed to work. IIRC, it's the way that Platformists distinguish what they're doing from Leninist vanguardism. Or what a group like the FAI is supposed to be doing in relation with the CNT. It's what the anarchist speakers were doing. It's what some theory nerds a decade ago were calling "seduction" ...I think. So, I think there is something intuitively anti-authoritarian about relying on "influence" or persuasion or inspiration or related ideas.

That isn't really what I think this TOTW is getting at...

I don't want to reduce what a contemporary "influencer" is to being simply someone with a lot of online reach or offline popularity in an subcultural scene. An "influencer" to me is someone who could do what former "taste makers" and "model consumers" did before them - get people to buy products, launch trends, represent a lifestyle - but without the skills and talents that had put people into that position before. Without knowing exactly how it was that these people were able to achieve such status and consequence, they become known by such consequence: influence. You couldn't call them rock stars or movie stars... they didn't do anything like that. A lot of the time they seemed to just be attractive people who were early adopters of new products that were able to build large audiences by just kind of being themselves. There was a bit of mystery as to why anyone was paying any attention to them. That was kind of the point. And this mystery generated a bunch of shit about contemporary cults of authenticity.

I basically just don't think that this is what we are seeing with popular anarchists online. It's clear to me why Anark, Zoe Baker, Andrewism, and others (including William Gillis) were able to gain their audiences. They're also not really performing the function of the Influencer that make the best examples of influencers wealthy. If they do advertising at all, they aren't positioning themselves as trend setters who are using some new product because it improves their life and it will improve yours too if you're cool enough to buy it...

Side note: been reading "The Jewish Anarchist Movement in America" and there is a footnote about how the Fraye Arbeter Shtime used to have ads in their paper... sometimes for banks, or cigarette companies, or laxative companies!

Ok so I think we can look at why the people I mentioned have the audience and social influence they do and we can learn some stuff about the subcultures we're part of. It's useful to think about all that. But I think if we want to grasp the phenomena of the Influencer in our society, these aren't good examples. I'm not sure if there can actually be an anarchist influencer. Maybe to some limited extent. But the way I think about the Influencer is that their ability depends on an absence of strong social opinion, political orientation, passion for unpopular causes. They tend to be people who can present themselves as "authentic" without getting immediately boxed into a category that is controversial.

And then there's people like Doctor Bones. That's something else from what I remember. That's a drama queen, a diva. It's a different M.O. It's someone who is always involved in controversies and can leverage the attention to the benefit of this or that... usually their own self-aggrandizement but sometimes advertisers get their cut. This is something that I think is more common in online political spaces. It makes these people influential and I'm sure a decent argument can be made that they're another type of influencer, but for me it takes away from what is so special about the Influencer when prima donnas are included in the category.

I could go on, I left a lot out. But my mind could change on this easily so whatever

GEF (not verified) Mon, 06/17/2024 - 20:27

In reply to by cyberdandy

"Side note: been reading "The Jewish Anarchist Movement in America" and there is a footnote about how the Fraye Arbeter Shtime used to have ads in their paper... sometimes for banks, or cigarette companies, or laxative companies!"

Hums... so is this why you once advetised for a well-known Italian brand of soft drinks?

Putting that aside... how to you compare or distinguish an influencer from more conventional proselytism? Aren't "influencers" just another Millenial rebranding?

On my part, I reject both Iif they are any different). Not only that's a way to be a poser celeb, but there's the deeper question of WHY would I want to change other people's minds about stuff, and worse, change their behavior? There appears to be an onset premise of being superior to others, of having a self-entitlement to patronizing.

I may be more selft-aware than many people, and having an anarchist consciousness might be giving me an edge over all the authoritarian chumps, and a better understanding of "the world", but I'm still in no position to claim what's better for others. Marxists do that a lot, but I don't.

anonymous (not verified) Tue, 06/18/2024 - 08:49

In reply to by GEF (not verified)

there is a difference between getting ideas out into the world (like rigorous concepts of anarchy that don't involve convincing masses of people--that's one such idea), and convincing people that the getter-out-of-ideas is the only correct person.

but you go on with your binary! enjoy!

anon (not verified) Mon, 06/24/2024 - 09:59

In reply to by anonymous (not verified)

You mean the one you made up?

I was only asking whether influencers aren't just a rebranding, but better a reframing within new structures of agency, of the activist, organizer, proselyte. As any of the latter agencies are not entirely without selfish motives (your getter-out-of-ideas). Actually they're very selfish, like Stirner would assert.

GO3 Mon, 06/17/2024 - 20:22

I think Chomsky is the most influential anarchist in recent history. Even if he is a bit old media. The surgeon general has warned that social media is as bad as smoking. So you may want to delete your account and go outside and touch grass. The great DARPA internet made it so we can all be publishers. In the old days publishing was limited to the privileged few, even DIY publishing was less trivial. Now everyone has a voice.

rocinante Tue, 06/18/2024 - 04:49

I want to leave a comment to share some thoughts and questions that have come up while thinking about this prompt. One reason why I want to respond to this prompt is because I often hear from adolescents of their love or disdain for controversial social media influencers like Andrew Tate, Logan/Jake Paul, TikTok houses, Donald Trump stans, and many other online celebrities that kids are super familiar with outside of the larger popular MSM culture. These same adolescents get the majority of their news and (dis)information from these influencers, like the recent stat that came out that said 1 in 5 adolescents in USA think sunscreen is dangerous or like conspiracy theories among kids about Helen Keller not existing, like the simulacra of when the Gulf War Did Not Take Place.

It makes me wonder where younger people interested in anarchy are finding out about the most beautiful idea these days. If the majority of young people in the USA are getting like 85%+ [I just reached for this percentage in my head, but I’m sure the data is out there and relatively close] of their information and ideas from a few social media platforms and influencers, that most of the time are terrible on many levels and not even factually accurate, how are anarchists intervening and participating in media for younger people? There are not a lot of texts in the anarchist world made for kids about anarchist ideas, even though anarchist (free)schools, alternative education, and youth liberation are at the core of anarchist ideas. Have anarchists failed to keep up with the times?

Greta Thunberg, while not an anarchist is a name that came to mind when thinking about examples of possible youth influencers creating messages for the world. One aspect these influencers bring to the table is that of social capital or the ability to find resources, favors, and information from one’s personal connections. Years ago, some influential anarchists would comment and mostly complain about the social capital that Aragorn! swayed over their social media and anarchist media. Of course, some of these very same anarchists have seen their complaints come full circle right back at them as their social media accounts grew to the largest anarchist accounts worldwide. With few anarchist youth messengers online, is this void of social capital negatively impacting the growth of anarchist ideas for the kids?

Has there been an anarchist influencer of sorts previously?

First, some brief numbers from YouTube about subscriptions to the following channels as of today:
ContraPoints 1.8 million subs (not specifically anarchist)
Andrewism 189k subs
Zoe Baker 81k subs
Anark 29.4k subs
CyberDandy 1.64k subs

Coming back to the anarchist influencer question, I’m not sure if there has ever been such a person or even if it is desired when thinking about the nature and sense of the definition. If anything, I do think this question does somewhat point to the YouTube channels mentioned above, although only the most popular ones. The influencer as anarchist job could be attractive due to the lucrative nature of such things, while also maintaining some autonomy and self-determination from the normal world of work that anarchists might find themselves doom scrolling through.

A lot of this conversation can seem pretty gross because influencers are related often to advertising, selling their personal “brand”, and being terminally online; however, cutting through some of the muck at the heart here I see how anarchists share their ideas and interact with the world. A large part of me doesn’t want to see or hear from a “famous” anarchist over social media about their hot anarchist summer or anarchist dinner, but a part of me thinks it might be fun and a popular way to share anarchist ideas with popular culture.

alex (not verified) Tue, 06/18/2024 - 10:47

In reply to by rocinante

i've seen the term "social capital" used in a number of different ways and i think it causes more confusion than it clarifies. as far as i know, it is a corporate management philosophy rooted in the idea of "investing in your employees" i.e. giving benefits beyond what is "demanded by the market" (the maximum level of exploitation possible while still maintaining a workforce). make your employees happy, efficiency improves. as a critical tool, it seems to me that its used to describe the way that people are able to exploit or leverage the "social labor" of others to expand a perceived quality like influence or importance, or to expand an entertainment business like a social media brand or a creative project. i guess the most common example of this is the audience for an entertainer acting as free advertisement, which must be as old as moneyed entertainment. another example might be an artist exploiting social dynamics around their work--such as controversy over their personal lives--to raise the value of their signature to investors.

personally, because there is no true ownership involved, i don't believe that "social capital" is the best way to describe these phenomena. if anything, these people who use their names, lives, images etc. to develop an economic return of some kind are primarily exploiting themselves, electing to deepen the way in which their relationship with their own craft, mind, life etc. are mediated by markets.

collapsing other examples of social dynamics into this kind of phenomenon seems like a mistake. leadership, authority, allure, all seem to me like distinct ways of thinking about the way in which a person's popularity or general social engagement can build on itself. there may be many strategies of building these things, including exploitation, self-abasement, whatever that do not involve directly engaging with any market or advertising algorithm.

in my experience, what i call "allure" above is the style of this type of phenomenon which has the most promise for nurturing dynamics favorable for anarchists. people who become sort of magnetizing poles around which others gather for a variety of reasons without necessarily adopting a particular viewpoint, without "following," and in fact sometimes to be antagonistic. i think your instincts that people displaying aspects of their life, having fun with it etc could absolutely be a part of this kind of process, again without flattening themselves into internet-based phenomena that will, regardless of intention, become shaped by the logic of the technologies their rely upon over time, less "captured" than domesticated.

lumpy (not verified) Tue, 06/18/2024 - 13:00

In reply to by alex (not verified)

have you come across varoufakis' idea of "cloud serfs" yet?

i doubt he's the only one talking about this but he uses a historical materialism angle that makes some sense to me. "cloud capital" has created "cloud feudalism" which is to say, a total regression back to feudal power dynamics that exists everywhere and nowhere in cyberspace with the zucks and bezoses as the new feudal lords.

so the "influencers" are basically just the most successful "cloud serfs" at a kind of hyper self-exploitation, that can be lucrative but ultimately, their cybernetic feudal overlords can arbitrarily take as much of the profits as they want, or randomly kick them off the platform to starve whenever they want, etc etc

you have no meaningful bargaining power, you exist at the whims of a rich dickhead and the moment you represent any kind of real threat, all your efforts can be instantly turned to dust. this is also in the context of the vast, VAST majority of "cloud serfs" working completely for free as .... something akin to slaves because they're not entitled to any compensation at all. their "labour" is their metadata as well as whatever content they make, which is of course, the only thing that's actually worth anything.

and the "influencers" are being rewarded with a tiny fraction of the ad revenue, most of which goes straight to the elysium orbital space station.

alex (not verified) Tue, 06/18/2024 - 14:37

In reply to by lumpy (not verified)

reminds me more than anything of the music scene/business, particularly with hordes of especially teenagers providing free labor (from the perspective of capital) and product. a segment of those people do so expressly with the desire to "break through" or "make it" but another does it from simple desire or love of the craft, and another does it (supposedly) in antagonism towards the market. the difference to me seems to be in the scale, de-localization, and whats for sale: everyday life (i'm exposed to a lot of "mommy blogger" content in particular) and political consciousness, among other things. one could perhaps also look at private groups, servers etc as corollaries to subcultural phenomena of various kinds in prior iterations of this kind of cultural (re)production. i think the important thing to recognize is that it is all acting as entertainment, therapeutically for and co-constitutively with the particular forms of alienation that shape people's "irl" experience.

the question as i see it is whether any of this can be made use of, and as much as i think we should keep these kinds of critique in mind it's also worth observing that artistic and musical spaces have historically been pretty important for "keeping the flame" as it were, especially during periods of reactionary consolidation. my sense is there are many people who qualify as "anarchist influencers" in this sense and as could be expected the ones that are broadly recognizable are for the most part not the ones bringing the most dynamism to these platforms, such as they are.

lumpy (not verified) Tue, 06/18/2024 - 16:19

In reply to by alex (not verified)

yeah, fer sure. for me, i was basically a hobo roadie, working for music festivals, one of the few people who was paid at all and still not very well.

but yeah, there's definitely positive effects too, as you say, in the same way that the musicians and artists have always made crucial contributions BUUUT they are only one of many means to the end and tend to forget that and get high on their own supply and stuff. the only ones i respect are frequently mentioning that, keeping themselves honest and inviting others to do the same.

i suppose "keepers of the flame" just really need to keep their radically egalitarian perspective, moreso the more reach and pull they get

alex (not verified) Tue, 06/18/2024 - 17:25

In reply to by lumpy (not verified)

yea i didnt mean to suggest it was necessary, sufficient, or even good, ha. just that it happens. as for reach and pull i dont really trust or expect anything from anyone who gets it, other than that they might kind of crystallize some stuff i think is good and get it into hands that might then reach for the living thing. i think the more you have the more difficult it is to be willing enough to lose all of it to be able to resist the appeal of one kind of security or another. and when what you have is "people's love and attention" i'm generally gonna assume that your self-interest dictates appeasement

anon (not verified) Tue, 06/18/2024 - 06:33

It could be argued that Vaush is an anarchist influencer, given that he identifies as an anti-fascist and libertarian socialist.

lumpy (not verified) Tue, 06/18/2024 - 13:15

In reply to by anon (not verified)

yeah but being a gamer doesn't seem to help him learn what those words actually mean

fukin gamer streamers sit in front of a damned computer ALL DAY, yammering in to their mics but they never seem to do the few extra clicks to learn anything about the topics they're blathering about.

isn't that weird? they're literally sitting in front of a machine that can answer almost any question, making epicly wrong assertions all day while a cult of personality orbits around their gigantic egos. strange stuff!

lumpy (not verified) Tue, 06/18/2024 - 13:32

In reply to by anon (not verified)

people around here actually cite and do research sometimes?
they also have to babysit people who obviously need a therapist
anyone who's worked customer service knows all about moonlighting as a therapist for free

anon (not verified) Mon, 06/24/2024 - 08:54

In reply to by lumpy (not verified)

is okay for answering some basic questions but most of the things i want to know are not held in that form

Haikuarchist (not verified) Tue, 06/18/2024 - 08:34

Anarchy's not here.
Anarchists are all off-line.
Stop the Spectacle.

GO3 Wed, 06/19/2024 - 11:39

In reply to by anon (not verified)

"The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) is a research and development agency of the United States Department of Defense responsible for the development of emerging technologies for use by the military.[3][4]

Originally known as the Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA), the agency was created on February 7, 1958, by President Dwight D. Eisenhower in response to the Soviet launching of Sputnik 1 in 1957. By collaborating with academia, industry, and government partners, DARPA formulates and executes research and development projects to expand the frontiers of technology and science, often beyond immediate U.S. military requirements.[5]

The Economist has called DARPA the agency that shaped the modern world, with technologies like "weather satellites, GPS, drones, stealth technology, voice interfaces, the personal computer and the internet on the list of innovations for which DARPA can claim at least partial credit."[6] Its track record of success has inspired governments around the world to launch similar research and development agencies."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DARPA

GO3 Wed, 06/19/2024 - 11:42

In reply to by GO3

"The origins of the Internet date back to research that enabled the time-sharing of computer resources and the development of packet switching in the 1960s.[2] The set of rules (communication protocols) to enable internetworking on the Internet arose from research and development commissioned in the 1970s by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) of the United States Department of Defense in collaboration with universities and researchers across the United States and in the United Kingdom and France.[3][4][5] The ARPANET initially served as a backbone for the interconnection of regional academic and military networks in the United States to enable resource sharing. The funding of the National Science Foundation Network as a new backbone in the 1980s, as well as private funding for other commercial extensions, encouraged worldwide participation in the development of new networking technologies and the merger of many networks using DARPA's Internet protocol suite.[6] The linking of commercial networks and enterprises by the early 1990s, as well as the advent of the World Wide Web,[7] marked the beginning of the transition to the modern Internet,[8] and generated sustained exponential growth as generations of institutional, personal, and mobile computers were connected to the network. Although the Internet was widely used by academia in the 1980s, the subsequent commercialization in the 1990s and beyond incorporated its services and technologies into virtually every aspect of modern life."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet

chris (not verified) Tue, 06/18/2024 - 13:57

I think there's a distinction to be made between an influencer (someone who prosthetizes and tries to convert others) and thinkers/writers. I always think of an influencer in general as someone who's trying to sell me something (gross), and therefore hard to take seriously. a writer may want you to be sympathetic to their writing, but not always, an influencer always wants you to see their views. both can be (micro)celebrities but influencers generally garner a following in ways writers don't. writers ideas are meant to be expanded on or critiqued, where influencers just want to convert. and when I think of influencers I think of strong assertions and while writers may do the same there's just as often, open ended questions, ideas that may evolve.

maybe I'm wrong, maybe the zoomers are onto something, I don't know. but I don't trust anyone who seems to be trying to win a popularity contest via likes and subscribes, and making themselves some sort of brand

anon (not verified) Tue, 06/18/2024 - 14:16

I think a big problem is a lot of us speak about anarchy or it's ideas or the news in relation to anarchy but aren't willing to get online. I mean, I'm not. At least publicly.

The problem here is, we are the ones that actually make anarchy look real, fun and interesting.

Most of these people online is like shit you fall asleep to. It's always the most boring people. Cyberdandy is probably the least boring in the list but talks about way too specific topics. That's not bad or anything it's just not really what's gonna draw tons of people.

Have just 5 minutes every day prank calling anarcho capitalists and horrible academics. Give me entertainment people.

I want to hear people talking about the shitting and fucking in the encampment debate on Twitter. Not taking it seriously but making fun of it. That stuff makes people interested.

anon (not verified) Tue, 06/18/2024 - 14:18

In reply to by anon (not verified)

When the inevitable fame induced drug and alcohol fallout comes kidnap an industrialist live on the show.

I'm not your producer folks just helping with ideas.

anon (not verified) Fri, 06/21/2024 - 15:19

them in such a way is kinda moralistic. However, i have never really been a fan of podcasts as they tend to be a slower and more boring way to get information.

anon (not verified) Sat, 06/22/2024 - 13:06

I am my biggest influencer. Introspection. Reflection. Honesty with oneself. Probably the biggest psy op/myth is humans are social creatures, really?

anon (not verified) Sat, 06/22/2024 - 13:28

In reply to by anon (not verified)

Thanks for sharing your totally individualistic, anti-social position with the entire internet, totally anti-social brah. I too am like you -- we don't need nobody!

anon (not verified) Mon, 06/24/2024 - 03:45

In reply to by anon (not verified)

needing humans!!! Most people get into misery through others: one is company, two is a crowd and three is mind games. How replies take on words that are not posted. Says it all. How others misrepresent from the getgo.

Tristram (not verified) Sun, 06/23/2024 - 21:11

Anarchist Influencers, what is this! I insist, ( all be it humbly and not up to being an influencer myself due to the innate sensitivities I acquired 9 months before my birth ) I insist on nothing being able to effect my unfortunate ab ovo nature!

dragyn (not verified) Mon, 06/24/2024 - 12:04

Yes, start a channel on YT and make some bucks advertising while whining about corporate bad guys and fake democracy. A win win for all! LOL

Why this even a serious question?

Clownworld people working here. Edit your brain. Proofread your low IQ. Anarchism is NOT being like everyone else and fighting the state, NOT joining in. OMG

It's like urban collectives or "forest defense" gatherings that have long lists of rules. FUCK ALL RULES

anon (not verified) Mon, 06/24/2024 - 12:20

12:04:

FUCK ALL RULES

Kropotkin:

Anarchy means no rulers. It doesn't mean no rules.

Between 12:04's anarchy of the Yeats poem and Kropotkin, I'll take Kropotkin.

Add new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.

Filtered HTML

  • Web page addresses and email addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a href hreflang> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul type> <ol start type> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
CAPTCHA
H
s
Y
b
5
W
e
M
Enter the code without spaces.
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.