Speaker 1: Welcome everyone to the It Could Happen Here podcast. My
Speaker 1: name is said Andrew, and I'll be your host as
Speaker 1: we talk about politics stuff with me today is Garrison Hello,
Speaker 1: and Christopher Hello, and Sufie him. And today we will
Speaker 1: be tackling or rather we'll be taking a trip to
Speaker 1: the anarchist activism in Latin America with A specifies more.
Speaker 1: But first we need to get into some context here.
Speaker 1: The first organization to promote the concept of a specifies
Speaker 1: MOO was the Federation Anarchista Uruguaya or the FAU, which
Speaker 1: is founded in nineteen fifty six by anarchist Milton's who
Speaker 1: embraced the idea of an organization that was specifically anarchist.
Speaker 1: But those who don't know, not long after, rather two
Speaker 1: decades after ni UM, the US installed a dictatorship in Uruguay,
Speaker 1: the last from nine. The FA you survived that dictatorship
Speaker 1: and went on to establish connections with other South American
Speaker 1: anarchist revolutionaries. So they helped to support the founding of
Speaker 1: the Fedahao Anarchista Gaochia or fer G. I don't know
Speaker 1: if I'm pronounced that correctly. The Federes shall an Artista
Speaker 1: Kola and the Ferres shall an Arkista the Rio de
Speaker 1: Janeiro or f the r G in their respective regions
Speaker 1: of Brazil, and they also helped to found the Argentinean
Speaker 1: organization as Alka, which means rebel. While only coming onto
Speaker 1: stage in Latin America within the last few decades. The
Speaker 1: ideas that really make up A specifies more tasan a
Speaker 1: historic threat that's really run to the anarchist movement internationally
Speaker 1: since the beginning. UM. It may as we get into
Speaker 1: like what is spect feasion is and stuff, it may
Speaker 1: sound very similar to platform is um. Are you all
Speaker 1: familiar with that current Yeah, I'm from familiar with platforms
Speaker 1: a little bit, but we can probably, I don't know,
Speaker 1: explain it for the people at at at home who
Speaker 1: are not as, who do not spend as much time
Speaker 1: thinking about old, old, old anarchist terms right right right,
Speaker 1: so their generic listener or viewer or whatever. UM. Platform
Speaker 1: is UM began with a document that was written in
Speaker 1: nine by the former Peasant Army leader Nestor Maknu either
Speaker 1: Met and other militants of the Yellow Truda or Workers
Speaker 1: Cause group. They published the document called Organizational Platform of
Speaker 1: the Libertarian Communists and it was written in response to
Speaker 1: well being exiled from the Russian Revolution um and having
Speaker 1: to struggle really to find their foot in after the
Speaker 1: Bolsheviks turn the work of Soviets into instruments of one
Speaker 1: party rule. UM. So the Power Space Group, the Deal Truder.
Speaker 1: They really criticized the anarchist movement for a lack of organization.
Speaker 1: So they proposed an alternative that is controversial to some anarchists,
Speaker 1: but it's essentially a general union of anarchists based on
Speaker 1: anarchist communism that would strive for theoretical and tactical unity.
Speaker 1: And I focused on class struggle and labor unions. Obviously,
Speaker 1: platform is um like all political ideas, it's not a
Speaker 1: static you know, the world has progressed sick significant lee
Speaker 1: in a century, so um. While there is an emphasis
Speaker 1: and workers struggle and class struggle. UM. When you speak
Speaker 1: to most platforms today, I would say, um, obviously I
Speaker 1: don't have stats on that. I would say most platforms
Speaker 1: can recognize that, you know, the no war with the
Speaker 1: class war is a bit reductive. UM. I've also noticed,
Speaker 1: actually that platformism has been getting a bit more popularity lately.
Speaker 1: I don't know if it's just me and my perception.
Speaker 1: But I don't know if you' all seen that I have.
Speaker 1: I've not seen tons of it here. A lot of
Speaker 1: the type of anarchism I'm around, or at least see
Speaker 1: is is not is not in this vein. But most
Speaker 1: most of the stuff I see is like around UM,
Speaker 1: like the kind of like live anarchy type kind of
Speaker 1: strains um and more individualists. Right, But that's just I
Speaker 1: think a very like Pacific Northwest specific thing that the
Speaker 1: anarchists here just kind of generally trend in that direction.
Speaker 1: So I'm not sure what it's literally like across like
Speaker 1: this country in other places around the world. Yeah, I know,
Speaker 1: I know, I know, I've definitely seen it. Especially I
Speaker 1: think I think it's it's I don't know, almost think
Speaker 1: it's bigger a few years ago. But back like there
Speaker 1: is a big spike of black rose um serious group
Speaker 1: for a while, and yeah, people who like called themselves
Speaker 1: like anarcho communists or anarcho syndicalists kind of generally swam
Speaker 1: in this general ocean. Yeah, I definitely saw that as
Speaker 1: a bigger thing in than now, at least like locally
Speaker 1: from my area. And I think I will say, yeah,
Speaker 1: the blacks people. A lot of them, like very very
Speaker 1: specifically were specific based, and a lot of it was
Speaker 1: based on like people who had like experiences with a
Speaker 1: specific moment very as ways, right right, yeah, because I
Speaker 1: was actually just about to say, I think that black
Speaker 1: Rose is more as specificity than Platform is. But of
Speaker 1: course there is you know, a lot of overlap between
Speaker 1: these two currents, right, Um. As for my experience with
Speaker 1: like platform and some and stuff, have seen UM discussions
Speaker 1: of it happening more. I mean, that's all I can
Speaker 1: really see that I've seen. UM. Have you ever read once?
Speaker 1: But at least if discussions are happening, the likelihood of
Speaker 1: things coming out of it might be a bit. In Greece,
Speaker 1: I guess another current that UM has been part of
Speaker 1: the anarchists milieu, psychgeist wave whatever is organizational dualism, which
Speaker 1: came out to the nineteen twenties Italian anarchist movement. So
Speaker 1: they use the tomb to describe involvements of anarchists both
Speaker 1: as members of anarchists specific political organizations and also as
Speaker 1: militants in the labor movement. In Spain, the Friends of
Speaker 1: Druti group emerged to oppose the Gradual reviews Cell, the
Speaker 1: Smash Revolution n and they also ended up emulating some
Speaker 1: of the ideas of the platform by criticizing you know,
Speaker 1: the cnt F phase, c ant f AIS, gradual reformism
Speaker 1: and collaboration with republican government. Um. So the spars of
Speaker 1: war and stuff. You know, there's a lot of forces
Speaker 1: that play and we're gonna get into now, but it is,
Speaker 1: I would say, as a side note, important to recognize
Speaker 1: that there is no model it when it comes to
Speaker 1: like these sort of civil wars and historical events. Um,
Speaker 1: you really have to look at things in context and
Speaker 1: you know, it's not trying to strip them away from
Speaker 1: the goings on at the time. Also, the Chinese anarchist
Speaker 1: movement of the nineteen tens um advocated for similar ideas.
Speaker 1: I'm going to try to pronounce the name of the group,
Speaker 1: hopefully don't get castled, but it's the who Shuang Fu Kong,
Speaker 1: Shan Jui Tong, She's a way, I think, which is
Speaker 1: the Society of Anarchists Communist Comrades. And yeah, they advocated
Speaker 1: for a lot of similar ideas. So there's a lot
Speaker 1: of different currents around the world influenced by you know,
Speaker 1: the historic conditions. But the general thread that you know
Speaker 1: anarchists need to get together and work as a unit
Speaker 1: is you know what's thrust in it, right and specifies more,
Speaker 1: is just a fresh continuation of this threat of this trend.
Speaker 1: So what is that? What is the specifies more exactly
Speaker 1: the three key concepts um that I see emphasized again
Speaker 1: and again. One the need for specifically anarchist organization built
Speaker 1: around a unity of ideas and practice. Two, the use
Speaker 1: of the specifically anarchist organization to theorize and develop strategic
Speaker 1: political and organizing work. And three active involvement in and
Speaker 1: building of autonomous and popular social movements, which is described
Speaker 1: as the process of social institution. So kind of core
Speaker 1: to the whole specificity current is which is rather antithectical
Speaker 1: some of the trends that I've seen in the past
Speaker 1: couple of years. It's sort of a rejection of this
Speaker 1: left unity idea, right, this idea that there can be
Speaker 1: these this sort of big tent organization that can somehow
Speaker 1: estab ash all these different visions simultaneously. Right. So I
Speaker 1: specificity reject the idea of just unity of unity's sake,
Speaker 1: because they feel it boils down to sort of Louis
Speaker 1: common denominate to kind of wishy washy politics. They feel
Speaker 1: it when unity is preferred at all costs, it leaves
Speaker 1: very little room for unified action or developed political discussion.
Speaker 1: In fact, in my experience, when you have like a
Speaker 1: lot of political heterogene um, there tends to be a
Speaker 1: lot of unproductive drama lack of better word. Obviously, people
Speaker 1: of different political stripes should work together, um, And there's
Speaker 1: no like harm in that. But at the same time,
Speaker 1: when it comes to certain types of organizations, having a
Speaker 1: sense of ideological unity is I would say pretty important.
Speaker 1: As you know, you don't want to have all these
Speaker 1: different groups constantly butting heads for all these different visions.
Speaker 1: You know, you want to have at least some sense
Speaker 1: that we're moving in sync. Right, So you're not going
Speaker 1: to have some people who are trying to establish social
Speaker 1: democracy and some people who are trying to get like
Speaker 1: this workers state code and code, or you know, people
Speaker 1: who just want i don't know, like a higher minimum reach, right.
Speaker 1: I mean, everyone's on a different stage of their political journey.
Speaker 1: But what specificity try to emphasize is that while we
Speaker 1: can work within these larger social movements, um, it's important
Speaker 1: that artists specifically come together to try to shape those
Speaker 1: movements in an organized way. And I'll explain because it
Speaker 1: kind of sounds a bit like anangotism for some people,
Speaker 1: this idea that you know, these this cabal of like
Speaker 1: revolutionaries are trying to manipulate things behind the scenes. But um, really,
Speaker 1: what a specificitts argue is that and I guess needed space.
Speaker 1: They need space for like common strategy and reflection and
Speaker 1: collective responsibility and you know, a place to discuss plans
Speaker 1: and build trust and share analysis and you know, put
Speaker 1: together shorts and long term goals all that jazz. Um.
Speaker 1: So will the specificitys do reach out to and work
Speaker 1: with social movements regardless of whether they fit this code
Speaker 1: and code anarchist purity test um. And I see that
Speaker 1: with my tongue planted family and cheek of course, Um,
Speaker 1: they want to make sure that they can sue still
Speaker 1: as an active minority, so that these movements aren't diluted.
Speaker 1: And so I noticed like throwing out a lot of
Speaker 1: different woods and freezers and ideas, um, you know, things
Speaker 1: like ideological unity and the need for sort of a
Speaker 1: consensus within the group. Um. And speaking of I've spoken
Speaker 1: about consensus on my channel before, so I have a
Speaker 1: breakdown on it. People can check out if they're like, um,
Speaker 1: I was spoke of unified strategy, right, So you're not
Speaker 1: just joking around, you actually have mapped out sort of strategy.
Speaker 1: Like for example, black socialists in America. They aren't like
Speaker 1: a specifically a specificity or to my knowledge, but you
Speaker 1: can see um that they have like a unified, like
Speaker 1: clearly leader strategy and they're making moves to make it
Speaker 1: to achieve it, and they're very public about those moves, right. Um.
Speaker 1: I also I want to emphasize, of course, in the
Speaker 1: specifies more the whole idea of this active minority. You know,
Speaker 1: it's not just a bunch of like it's not like
Speaker 1: a path of book club, right. And a specificity group
Speaker 1: is a group of people who are passionate about you
Speaker 1: know this cause um, and obviously passionate people have this
Speaker 1: habit of for they can more than they can chew. Right.
Speaker 1: So what I would advise like a specificity and a
Speaker 1: specificity judgment adjacent groups and really just organizations in general,
Speaker 1: is that keep your size in mind, keep achievable goals
Speaker 1: within sight, because if you don't you know, it's very
Speaker 1: easy to burn out very quickly. Yeah. Um. With the
Speaker 1: specificity groups, it's important that they understand their responsibility, but
Speaker 1: also that they understand their limits. Lastly, and very importantly,
Speaker 1: social institution, I think is one of the most important
Speaker 1: parts for specificity mo and I think even if you
Speaker 1: do want to take anything away from like specificity specifies more,
Speaker 1: you at the very least like implement social institution or
Speaker 1: at least concepts within social institution into organizing, right because obviously, um,
Speaker 1: and I guess a kind of fewer number. But what
Speaker 1: social institution tries to point out I guess, or tries
Speaker 1: to develop within a movement, it's just awareness that the
Speaker 1: people who are making these moves from organizing and whatnot,
Speaker 1: that they don't relinquish their power to like other figures
Speaker 1: or forces or parties or whatever the case may be. Right, Um,
Speaker 1: Social institutions times in the belief that the oppressed but
Speaker 1: the most revolutionary sector society and the seed of future
Speaker 1: revolutionary transformations society lies already in these classes and social groupings.
Speaker 1: So it doesn't mean socialization doesn't mean like acting within
Speaker 1: single issue advocacy campaigns or you know, like trying to
Speaker 1: take over people's existing struggles. It means getting involved in
Speaker 1: daily fights and daily struggles people to better their own conditions.
Speaker 1: It means, you know, connecting with workers, connecting with immigrants,
Speaker 1: connecting across neighborhoods, working towards racial liberation, working within students
Speaker 1: struggles and tenant struggles. As people are like part of
Speaker 1: these struggles, they become conscious of their place in society, right,
Speaker 1: And part of our rule is to try to develop
Speaker 1: their consciousness. So as people are tempered and tested and recreated,
Speaker 1: they see their position in the what we're looking for
Speaker 1: in the pecking order. Right. They see that there are
Speaker 1: forces that play that are keeping them down, their structures
Speaker 1: play that are keeping them down, and they change from
Speaker 1: just being like social classes to being active social forces.
Speaker 1: So they're brought together by organic methods and by self
Speaker 1: organized cohesion. What you notice of the popular movements, like
Speaker 1: for example, Black Lives Matter, is that the unlike what
Speaker 1: some conservatives might assume, the Black Lives Matter organization wasn't
Speaker 1: the one like pulling the strings, you know, like the
Speaker 1: official group wasn't there, you know, telling people okay, march here,
Speaker 1: puting that right here, move that you know, it's like
Speaker 1: the people themselves came together and you know, really expressed
Speaker 1: the desire for change. And so really, as they become
Speaker 1: self conscious actors, aware of their power, of their voice,
Speaker 1: of their nemesis, which is the ruling elites that control
Speaker 1: the social order, a specificitys try to keep that thrust. Right.
Speaker 1: What a specificity argue is that essentially there's an anarchist
Speaker 1: on the current two popular social movements that should be
Speaker 1: preserved and maintained and cultivated. Right with popular movements, Um,
Speaker 1: they're very quickly co opted by impositions of leadership or
Speaker 1: by you know, academic elites or by political parties. But
Speaker 1: specificity aren't there to try to make groups identify as anarchists, right,
Speaker 1: They're there to just maintain that thrust, to be self
Speaker 1: organized and to fight for their own interests because ultimately
Speaker 1: that's our natural impulse as months. You know, it's really
Speaker 1: the propaganda that tells us, you know, um, like you
Speaker 1: have to go through these proper channels. You know, you
Speaker 1: have to vote with your dollar or you know, food
Speaker 1: for these politicians or whatever the case may be. Converse,
Speaker 1: and all these different things call up your representatives. The
Speaker 1: natural thrust of a person is not to like relinquished
Speaker 1: control of themselves, you know, it's to try to maintain
Speaker 1: that um and so a specifics trying to push against
Speaker 1: the propaganda that keeps us from maintaining that, push against
Speaker 1: the co optation that ships that from us. Soup. Do
Speaker 1: any sort of automatic critiques of a specifies move come
Speaker 1: to mind for y'all? I'm not sure about like critiques
Speaker 1: per se. We need to think about it more, But
Speaker 1: a few things that come to mind around so, like
Speaker 1: you talked a bit about like the difference between like
Speaker 1: left unity and creating like an anarchist unity, um, and
Speaker 1: for people at home, I would like to maybe extrapolate
Speaker 1: why those are different things. I know you have a
Speaker 1: good video on left unity already, but like in terms
Speaker 1: of trying to like, you know, if if one of
Speaker 1: the goals being creating like an anarchist organization that kind
Speaker 1: of unifies different anarchists, how that is a different type
Speaker 1: of unity than just left unity in general. UM. I
Speaker 1: think that might be a point of clarification. And then
Speaker 1: the other thing I was wondering about is like how
Speaker 1: does this intersect in terms of like individual goals versus
Speaker 1: like group goals or like organizational goals and so like,
Speaker 1: because like there's a there's a back and forth between
Speaker 1: like personal autonomy and then you know these type of
Speaker 1: social movements that kind of almost gained their own thrust.
Speaker 1: Yeh right, right, Yes. To the point about the difference
Speaker 1: between Left unity and anarchist unity, um, well, obviously artists
Speaker 1: or soon fairly heterogeneous. Um, I think our general thrust
Speaker 1: for self determination and autonomy and that kind of thing
Speaker 1: is it brings us together. You know. The difference between
Speaker 1: like say anarchist unity, where they're differently some I would
Speaker 1: say key disagreements within the milieu and left unity is
Speaker 1: that I feel there are some extremely incompatible factors that
Speaker 1: prevent Left unity from being viable. Yeah, when there's a
Speaker 1: thrust among significant segments, I mean really every non libertarian
Speaker 1: segment of you know, they couldn't get left to uh
Speaker 1: funn our popular energy towards state institutions, whether it be
Speaker 1: through insurrectionary social democracy or reformist social democracy in a
Speaker 1: case of amounts and stock damage respectively. Um, I think
Speaker 1: that that really keeps us from really working together on
Speaker 1: anything more than small goals and small projects. I mean,
Speaker 1: we've really seen the whole left unity idea of fall apart,
Speaker 1: you know, through wars and through even just like what
Speaker 1: should be discussions between people, you know, like the First
Speaker 1: International literally split because of the differences between you know,
Speaker 1: the so called left currents, you know, between the anarchists
Speaker 1: and the other socialists. So last unity is now something
Speaker 1: that I even to achieve. I think most people know
Speaker 1: that about me by now, um. But regard to like
Speaker 1: anarchist unity, and of course the differences between an artists,
Speaker 1: I think the general rusted to maintain the autonomy and
Speaker 1: self determination of the people and of the social movements
Speaker 1: via inserting ourselves in is what really clues us together.
Speaker 1: And of course that alone, I don't know if that's
Speaker 1: enough to maintain in a specificity organization, because you know,
Speaker 1: like I noted, a specificitys try to um develop deeper
Speaker 1: level you know, strategies and theoretical discussion and that kind
Speaker 1: of thing, And so with those sort of discussions, you
Speaker 1: know you're gonna see a lot more of the distinctions
Speaker 1: bearing out. But at the very least, UM, I think
Speaker 1: anarchists generally could benefit from a degree of at least
Speaker 1: unity in the sense of maintaining or soularity in the
Speaker 1: sense of maintaining the libertarian thrust of popular movements. I
Speaker 1: asked the other thing that you had noted about the
Speaker 1: sort of friction between individual goals and organizational goals, between
Speaker 1: autonomy and sort of how social movements end up taking
Speaker 1: on like an energy of their own. Um. To be
Speaker 1: quite honest, I don't think I have like a fully
Speaker 1: developed answer for that. Yeah, um, Because, on the one hand,
Speaker 1: a social movement that forgets that it is about, you know,
Speaker 1: deliberation of individuals is you know, in my view of
Speaker 1: social movement that's quickly going to and obtaining against the
Speaker 1: people who are you know, fueling it. At the same time,
Speaker 1: I interacting with like a lot of people what pretty
Speaker 1: selfish or pretty egotistical or just argumentative for the sake
Speaker 1: of it. Sorry, So if you're gonna say something, yeah,
Speaker 1: I was just like, the thing that keeps popping up
Speaker 1: into my head is, you know, one of the things
Speaker 1: that gets misconstrued all the time is who's calling the shots.
Speaker 1: And I kind of feel like what you're saying is
Speaker 1: everybody in a way, right, Yeah? Yeah, I think that like,
Speaker 1: which is good sometimes but not good other times. Obviously
Speaker 1: exactly because I think it's it's very easy to fall
Speaker 1: into this sort of um almost reactionary I like island
Speaker 1: mentality not island mentality is incribean islan mentality isn't fussiness
Speaker 1: and as an island around like autonomy and you know
Speaker 1: personal freedom, you know, like this renting idea that you
Speaker 1: know on step map property, you know that kind of
Speaker 1: thing just let people do whatever. It's kind of like
Speaker 1: most alarchrocaplist conception of what like freedom and autonomy is
Speaker 1: I think an important part of autonomy and you know
Speaker 1: freedom and yeah, like this project is you know, accountability
Speaker 1: and is you know, like consequences like social consequences and
Speaker 1: how your actions affect others. You know, like what you
Speaker 1: said he was to recognize is that we are not
Speaker 1: in fact islands. You know, our actions or behavioral words
Speaker 1: affect other people. And so I think it's going to
Speaker 1: be a constant project to sort of balance um individual
Speaker 1: personalities and BROADERCT goals. But I mean, yeah, it's it's
Speaker 1: trick right, Like you know, we're you're talking about like
Speaker 1: some kind of you know, group organization to work together
Speaker 1: to kind of you know, think of achievable goals and
Speaker 1: create steps to get there um. And I feel among
Speaker 1: a lot of people who proudly declare themselves anarchists and
Speaker 1: at least like and they're extremely vocal. Like these are
Speaker 1: like people both like online and in person organizing that
Speaker 1: are very are very like vocal and try to very
Speaker 1: much like make their place known. We've seen trends away
Speaker 1: from this direction in terms of like rejecting the idea
Speaker 1: of goals and demands and just you know, like this
Speaker 1: this more insurrectionary kind of tendency of just making total
Speaker 1: destroy for the sake of it and committee, yeah, and
Speaker 1: and and and that. I mean, like I know that
Speaker 1: like platform is m is kind of like it's not
Speaker 1: like Antiens insurrectionary, but it's like it's it definitely critiques
Speaker 1: that type of instructionary rend um. So I'm thinking about, like,
Speaker 1: you know, this idea and like how with with with
Speaker 1: this kind of general you know, decentralized, no no demands,
Speaker 1: no goals kind of general kind of direction that like
Speaker 1: capital a anarchists are are doing. How like what's what's
Speaker 1: maybe some parts of a specific that we can actually
Speaker 1: take into account to be like hey maybe there's you know,
Speaker 1: like I I don't like, I don't like being called,
Speaker 1: like any adjective anarchist. I think it's silly. I like
Speaker 1: I like the parts, um, I think earlier this year
Speaker 1: or yeah, the last year, Like I just got to
Speaker 1: the point for you, I'm an anarchist, you know that's yeah, Yeah,
Speaker 1: I like the parton desert. It's like, I'm an anarchist
Speaker 1: of many adjectives. I'm not, I'm not I'm not always
Speaker 1: an insurrectionary, I'm not always a syndicalist. I'm not always
Speaker 1: you know, blah blah blah blah blah blah blah. Um.
Speaker 1: And I feel like that's would be really useful kind
Speaker 1: of thing for people to focus on more in terms of, yeah,
Speaker 1: it can be fun to make total destroying that it's
Speaker 1: a very base instinct, but it also would be great
Speaker 1: to like improve people's lives a little bit um and yeah,
Speaker 1: and there's like to to to kind of like dueling things.
Speaker 1: Um and in terms that's why I do really like
Speaker 1: the part of like this type of stuff that it's
Speaker 1: really appealing to me just because I kind of already
Speaker 1: work on this myself, so I'm like, oh, I'm I'm
Speaker 1: already doing this, but it's like the it is it
Speaker 1: is like the social the social insertion side of things,
Speaker 1: I think is something that would be a much a
Speaker 1: much better way of thinking about. Like everyone hates talking
Speaker 1: about optics because yeah, it's frustrating, but I think the
Speaker 1: social insertion method is a better framework for kind of
Speaker 1: dealing with some of those same problems. Um. And yeah,
Speaker 1: and then like you know, there is even among insurrectionaries
Speaker 1: and all those you know, all those types, there still
Speaker 1: is like a decent amount of like group projects and stuff,
Speaker 1: and that is I think a really good thing to
Speaker 1: focus on because but yeah, there's not many anarchists, and
Speaker 1: it would be cool if there was more. And if
Speaker 1: we just focus on the parts that make people go,
Speaker 1: oh that's kind of silly and pointless, then we're not
Speaker 1: really going to grow anarchism that much. Um. So highlighting
Speaker 1: the parts they are like, oh, yeah, you're actually helping people.
Speaker 1: That's gonna convince a lot more people who are kind
Speaker 1: of already trending in that general general direction, and then hey,
Speaker 1: maybe in a few years they can also be doing
Speaker 1: silly destruction for fun, because it is it is fun sometimes, right, Yeah,
Speaker 1: Like this, as you mentioned optics, I reminded it is
Speaker 1: kind of pet peeve I have with some you know,
Speaker 1: instant people where they try to treat like ideologies or
Speaker 1: specifically anarchism as like a pr project that we have
Speaker 1: to like constantly be trying to shift the optics and
Speaker 1: micromanaged like every aspect. Like No, I think that as
Speaker 1: remedy for like, because you're not going to match the
Speaker 1: power of mass media. What you can do to push
Speaker 1: back against a sort of propaganda is help people, and
Speaker 1: help people and identify as anarchists as you're helping people, right, Like,
Speaker 1: that's the easiest and quickest way to dispel people's notions
Speaker 1: and like conceptions of what an anarchist is. If we
Speaker 1: were to take like socialization right and sort of, I
Speaker 1: would say, there's still it's a bit and individualize it
Speaker 1: a bit. Um. I would say that as a practice,
Speaker 1: you know, just even if you don't know any any
Speaker 1: other anarchists in your area, right, just being there, being
Speaker 1: in these movements helping people and you know, saying you know,
Speaker 1: this is what I believe. Um, Just talking to people
Speaker 1: about what you believe as a place and as you're
Speaker 1: helping them, you know, that goes a long way, much
Speaker 1: longer than any you know, poster UM campaign or like
Speaker 1: wheat pasting initiative or artwork um you know, wall arts
Speaker 1: or whatever, you know, like actively helping people. Of course
Speaker 1: wall lot has its place and double little bit myself,
Speaker 1: but you know it's it's not it's ultimately like talking
Speaker 1: to people and helping people and being their people and
Speaker 1: being honest about your intentions that I think, you know,
Speaker 1: we should working towards. And I think those types of
Speaker 1: projects are something that the specific model like excels that
Speaker 1: in terms of like creating like a unity of anarchists
Speaker 1: who get like who have like a goal in mind
Speaker 1: and then go out to achieve the goal. Helping people
Speaker 1: like doing like doing like like like direct directly helping
Speaker 1: people is something that that type of organization model is
Speaker 1: kind of the best at UM because you can yeah,
Speaker 1: really like or aize things much better with a small
Speaker 1: group like that and create goals that are actually very achievable,
Speaker 1: whether it be you know, building a community kitchen or
Speaker 1: building you know, heating centers for like for the winter,
Speaker 1: like under under bridges or whatever. You know, all those
Speaker 1: types of starting community gardens, all those types of things
Speaker 1: are I think what this type of model really excels
Speaker 1: at and Yeah, you don't need to change your ideology
Speaker 1: to this one word because that's that's silly. But you
Speaker 1: can pick up different parts of it, be like, yeah,
Speaker 1: that actually seems like a useful way of the world
Speaker 1: that you want, you know, a politicians just ruling hand,
Speaker 1: co opt our project, you know, like just basic things
Speaker 1: like that, you know, and then from there, you know,
Speaker 1: as you are talking with people and meeting people who
Speaker 1: are passionate about issues in these social movements. You know,
Speaker 1: not only does it keep you from developing this sort
Speaker 1: of um pretumularly online um in group kind of mentality,
Speaker 1: it also opens up opportunities you to develop your and
Speaker 1: this is on the topic of like the individualist social institution,
Speaker 1: it prints or presents oportunities for you to develop your
Speaker 1: own had no like book club, and then from that
Speaker 1: book club could come and a specificity organization. You know,
Speaker 1: as you begin to develop your politics and your shared politics,
Speaker 1: more can come out of it. So don't underestimate, you know,
Speaker 1: the potential of just putting in the work and talking
Speaker 1: to people. Yeah, you know, just being there on the ground.
Speaker 1: One of the best things you can do to help
Speaker 1: stay alive in the well things are heading in the
Speaker 1: direction that they're heading societally is like making friends and
Speaker 1: forming a friend group and then yeah, like actually doing
Speaker 1: stuff together. That makes dealing with everything else that's happening
Speaker 1: so so much better. And hey, remember our old friend
Speaker 1: Nest Nest remarking started with a book club, so hey,
Speaker 1: you know, you never know where book clubs could lead
Speaker 1: exactly exactly. It's actually really interesting. Um video clip of
Speaker 1: Marie book Gin talking about book clubs and like the
Speaker 1: power and potential book clubs. Um. I don't know if
Speaker 1: we could probably link that in the show notes, but
Speaker 1: it's like a really interesting make sure drinks. So ultimately,
Speaker 1: a specificity believe that social movements we reached their own
Speaker 1: logic of creating revolution. Not when they all just decide
Speaker 1: to identify as anarchists and weave the black flag, but
Speaker 1: when the majority reach a consensus and a consciousness of
Speaker 1: their power and the ability to exercise their power in
Speaker 1: their daily lives. So even if they do not adopt anarchism,
Speaker 1: they still consciously adopt the ideas embedded within it. They
Speaker 1: are multiple political currents will exist within any movement, and
Speaker 1: so it's important that we as anarchists, and I guess
Speaker 1: specifically as a specificity are there to actively combat the
Speaker 1: opportunism that come from you know, these forces from this
Speaker 1: whether electoral or find goddess within these social movements as well,
Speaker 1: we can also help to push them further through um,
Speaker 1: you know, pushing for more direct democracy and consensus, through federalism,
Speaker 1: and confederating with other social movements through you know, building
Speaker 1: up the mutual aid within these movements. Like if you are,
Speaker 1: for example, part of a mutual aid group in one neighborhood,
Speaker 1: you can push them to start reaching out with mutually
Speaker 1: groups and other neighborhoods and creating a network of mutual
Speaker 1: aid groups that can build into something bigger, you know,
Speaker 1: combining resources and manpower to really push the revolution, you know. Lastly,
Speaker 1: I will say that for those who are trying to
Speaker 1: like get into the whole specifies more thing. Um. I mean,
Speaker 1: you could start a new organization from scratch. But again,
Speaker 1: like the easiest thing to do is suggest getting there
Speaker 1: to people and be honest with the people. And I
Speaker 1: keep saying the people, even though I have my critiques
Speaker 1: of this amorphous conception of the people, but the point
Speaker 1: remains that our goal is to spread our ideas, not
Speaker 1: to get people on any particular ideology, but to get
Speaker 1: a liberatory consciousness on the ground and to generalize that consciousness.
Speaker 1: And for those who are curious about the specifies more
Speaker 1: in action and social institutions, specifically the Federal show Anarchista
Speaker 1: GAUSHA in Brazil has worked with neighborhood committees and urban
Speaker 1: villages and slums. They've built alliances with the rank and
Speaker 1: file members of the rural land as workers movement the
Speaker 1: must and they've also worked with trash and recyclables collectors
Speaker 1: UM Brazil. For those who don't know, as a lot
Speaker 1: of high levels of temporary uh and contingent employment, underemployment
Speaker 1: and unemployment. So the working class isn't how will you
Speaker 1: traditionally conceive it as like just surviving primarily off of
Speaker 1: wage labor, but it's more so this is sort of
Speaker 1: subsistence work informal economy, gig economy can deal. So being
Speaker 1: able to connect with these when trash collectors, for example,
Speaker 1: who are part of this out of the economy, the
Speaker 1: FIG has built a strong relationship with them and help
Speaker 1: them to form their own national organization to you know,
Speaker 1: push for their interests and to collectivize their recycling Operations
Speaker 1: specifies More is also um worked with the has also
Speaker 1: worked in the efforts of the Zabalaza Anarchist Communist Front
Speaker 1: in South Africa, as they also are strong opponents of
Speaker 1: social institution and you know, really being embedded in these
Speaker 1: social movements in Argentina, in Brazil, in South Africa, and
Speaker 1: in the US in the case of Black Rows Anarchist
Speaker 1: Federation specifies, More has been building as a key point
Speaker 1: reference and so I'll leave us off with a code
Speaker 1: from the use of Front Collective, an anarchist group online.
Speaker 1: If libertarian socialists merely organized with libertarian socialists, and they
Speaker 1: will lose contact with the broader population they need to
Speaker 1: be reaching. If libertarian socialists merely joined social movements without
Speaker 1: advocating various libertarian socialist practices that can be used, then
Speaker 1: social movements can easily drift into being susceptible to reformist
Speaker 1: and strategic liberal and Lendinist tendencies and opportunists. If libertarian
Speaker 1: socialists merely joined social movements and try to spread ideas
Speaker 1: and practices in mere individual ways, they'll be far less
Speaker 1: successful than a well thought out, coordinated effort. And if
Speaker 1: theoretically specific libertarian socialist groups try to control social movements
Speaker 1: and popular organizations from the top down. Then such specific
Speaker 1: groups sacrifice their own principles and would reproduce hierarchical organizer.
Speaker 1: In contrast to authoritarian fine goddess conceptions, specifies more groups
Speaker 1: and a specificity put their activity towards a self organization
Speaker 1: of movements and organizations ultimately, as I honestly love this
Speaker 1: code from Shanti Alston, power to the people, where it
Speaker 1: stays with the people. Peace, Yes, Andrew, please please plug
Speaker 1: your plug doubles because they are good and people should
Speaker 1: in fact listen to them, right, Thank you, Safety Foost.
Speaker 1: Of course, I will say that you can follow me
Speaker 1: on Twitter at Underscore Seeing Drew and on YouTube at
Speaker 1: st Andrew's um and you can find me here apparently
Speaker 1: twice a month, which is pretty great. Shout out. It
Speaker 1: could happen here. Take care everyone, Peace again these again
Speaker 1: it could happen here as a production of pool Zone Media.
Speaker 1: For more podcasts from cool Zone Media, visit our website
Speaker 1: cool zone media dot com, or check us out on
Speaker 1: the I Heart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you
Speaker 1: listen to podcasts. You can find sources for it could
Speaker 1: happen here, updated monthly at cool Zone. You get dot
Speaker 1: com slash sources. Thanks for listening.