Oooookay

[eateroftrees]

Someone reblogged my angry rant about how vandalism ends up mostly hurting lower class people with a ridiculous privilege deny-y rant about how anything that supports the legitimacy of property supports the legitimacy of the state.

Like... okay this is why I REALLY HATE anarchism.

I said "don't trust" on my tumblr but honestly it's more like... IF YOUR INSISTANCE THAT THE STATE IS EVIL GOES SO FAR AS TO SAY THAT CONCERN ABOUT THOSE WHO ARE ALREADY RELATIVELY OPPRESSED AND MAY ONLY, I DON'T KNOW, BE SURVIVING BECAUSE OF THE EXISTENCE OF THINGS POWERED BY THE STATE, YOU'RE JUST A PRIVILEGED ASSHOLE.

Holy shit this is pissing me off right now.

It's at least partially because I AM ONLY FUCKING ALIVE RIGHT NOW BECAUSE OF THE GOVERNMENT.

And, I don't know, maybe violence against property is also INCREDIBLY FUCKING INTIMIDATING.  Do you think people who work at a store you go smash the windows of is going to feel safer knowing you've challenged their capitalist oppressors?

What the fuck.

I'm certainly not a fan of half the shit the government (or the corporate feudal overlords) are doing, but I'm not going to trust anyone who wants to destroy it completely without putting some fucking thought into how it might effect people in positions of less privilege.  And I don't particularly trust communities to work everything out without completely screwing over the disabled people in the absence of a government.

Besides 3/4 of the people I interact with are not in a position to benefit from their local communities.

...now I'm worried I'm going to piss off my friends.  Agh. >.> But yeah I a) am basically only surviving and having any quality of life right now because of social security, and b) I don't trust anything that isn't the government any more than I trust the government.

Comments

[paristhroughthewindow]

I'm an anarchist, but I don't think that institutionalized violence is, like, cool as long as it isn't connected with the state. Destroying property in a way that doesn't challenge the systematic creation of property != automatic anarchist points. Seriously.

[technicolortimecoat]

*agrees with Devyn*

and there's a crapload of ableist shit from anarchism and all the other problems with itself and while I believe in it, I think it needs to get a WHOLE lot (decades to centuries, depending) further before I can be all "okay no more state now please"

I'm uncomfortable with the phrase "violence against property" though, FYI. I'd say that any violence involved is indirect, and against people.

[eateroftrees]

Yeah okay "violence against property" isn't quite the right word. I do want a term that conveys how destruction of property that's currently in use serves to devalue the labor put into creating said property and serves as intimidation that may also hurt people working to improve the system from the inside.

(And the currently in use thing is pretty important I think; part of the problem about capitalism is the ownership of resources serves to lock people out of resources that aren't actually being used by forcing them to remain unused until the "owner" decides to do something with them.)

Which basically I want anarchism to think before it acts because, yeah, acting without thinking usually just hurts more people. (And if it IS thinking before acting then I might be willing to get on board.)

[technicolortimecoat]

oh additionally re: "Besides 3/4 of the people I interact with are not in a position to benefit from their local communities."

yeah. exactly.

there's a widespread (in general, but equally unchecked among activists) assumption that people have the same resources/opportunities - that some people don't lack social lives (in my case due mostly to ableism and my parents taking a course of action that almost seems deliberately intended to rid me of all opportunities/assistance), that anarchist/radical-left communities have resources for everyone (uh no there's major problems with racism, sexism, cissexism, heterosexism, and very little discussion of ableism even when problems are trying to be corrected*)

and it's just, like, no. your "scene" is not this perfect little group that hasn't absorbed any of society's problems, it's exclusionary (especially of disabled people), there are a ton of issues.

I wouldn't be so frustrated with other anarchists all the time if I didn't run into problems.

*and there's problems with the rare occasions when ableism is discussed. cheezus.

[eateroftrees]

Yeeeep.

I think the "We must have a dramatic revolution now!" groups are almost inevitably privileged in some way.

(I think a far more productive way to think of it is "We are having a revolution RIGHT NOW its a gradual process and rarely is as dramatic as marching on the capital and blowing shit up.")