Filed under: Milwaukee area, update | Tags: AAA, anarchisism, bonnot, colton, history, illegalism, milwaukee, UWM
Anti-Authoritarians Anonymous presents a free lecture on illegalism put on by a friend of ours, 6pm, Wednesday the 27th, at room 191 in the University of Wisconsin Milwaukee.
“This presentation will offer a historical examination of Illegalism. The details of the actions–their successes and failures–and the responses at the time from their supporters and detractors. This will be compared to the illegalist actions taken today. The emphasis will be a historical comparison of the different periods and a discussion about the motivations that led the individuals to the choices they made.
…In detail we will discuss the earlier period of so-called propaganda-by-the-deed and, individual and social re-appropriation, and also the newer forms of illegalism such as alienated re-appropriation, break-window-write-manifesto, and modern political violence. We will be discussing the rich tapestry of ideas that bridge the early to current period and whether these phenomena are a passing fad or are the new shape of anarchy.
“…you have not been able to destroy anarchy. Its roots go deep: its spouts from the bosom of a rotten society that is falling apart; it is a violent backlash against the established order; it stands for the aspirations to equality and liberty which have entered the lists against the current authoritarianism. It is everywhere. That is what makes it indomitable, and it will end by defeating you and killing you.”
-Émile Henry address to the jury”
Filed under: Milwaukee area, update | Tags: anarchism, anarchy, egoist, enemies of society, illegalism, max stirner, the deed, the individual
The bookmobile is selling copies for $10 and should have them available within the next week.
From Ardent press:
“An Anthology of Individualist & Egoist Thought
This book tells the story of the most neglected tendency in anarchist thought; egoism. The story of anarchism is usually told as a story of great bearded men who had beautiful ideas and a series of beautiful failures, culminating in the most beautiful failure of them all in the Spanish Civil War. A noble history of failed ideas and practice.
Egoism, and individualist anarchism, suffers a different kind of fate. It is not a great history and glorious failure but an obscure series of stories of winning. Victory defined by the only terms that matter, those who lived life to their fullest and whose struggle against the existing order defined them. This struggle was not one of abstractions, of Big Ideas, but of people attempting to claim an authentic stake in their own life.
Inspired by the writings of Stirner’s “The Ego and His Own” the assertion these people make it not of the composition of a better world (for everyone) but of how the machinations of society, especially one of abstractions and Big Ideas, have shaped the individual members of that society. How everything that we know and believe has been shaped by structure and intent into a conformed, denatured shadow of what we could be.
Individualists anarchists have always argued that anarchism should not be a version of heaven on earth but a “plurality of possibilities”. This has relegated their activity to the actions that people make in their lives rather than participating in political bodies and formations that shape, and participate in, society. Egoists have gone to war with this world, robbed banks, practiced free love, and won everything except those things worth nothing: history, politics, & acceptance by society.
People like you have been denounced as “enemies of society”. No doubt you would indignantly deny being such and claim that you are trying to save society from the vampire of the State. You delude yourselves. Insofar as “society” means an organized collectivity having one basic norm of behavior that must be accepted by all (and that includes your libertarian communist utopia) and insofar as the norm is a product of the average, the crowd, the mediocre, then anarchists are always enemies of society. There is no reason to suppose that the interests of the free individual and the interests of the social machine will ever harmonize, nor is it desirable that they should. Permanent conflict between the two is the only perspective that makes any sense to me. But I expect that you will not see this, that you will continue to hope that if you repeat “the free society is possible” enough times then it will become so.”