1. — How would you most succinctly define anarchism? Is there a shared “anarchist project” — and, if so, how would you characterize it?
“My” anarchism, and not an historically accurate description, could probably not be succinctly defined, but I’ll give it a shot: Living is strange and I find myself here and in this capacity with disgust and hatred for this world, and I sense within myself a wholesale rejection of authority, morality, legitimacy, and duty(apologies for redundancy); statist, capitalist, spectacular, and normative social relations; ideology, progress, and linear time; and all the various effects, consequences, and internalizations of current and historical social relations. I’m skeptical of a shared ‘anarchist project’.
2. — What is the relationship between anarchism and the concept of anarchy?
Answer Provided: Anarchism, as the embrace and strategy of anarchy, is my approach. But I would say that the relationship currently and historically is not an embrace of anarchy, but a more refined technique of recuperation and spectacularization that reproduces social relations and structures of the State, Capital, Family, Marriage, Law, etcetera.
3. — What is the value of tradition within the anarchist milieus and what might be its uses?
Tradition is only valuable to me if it facilitates discourse, learning, strategy, and reflection. A firm and rapid break with tradition is an elation that should not be reserved or held back at the first sign of imposition or inconvenience.
4. — What, specifically, is the role to be played in the present by the anarchist literature — whether theoretical or artistic — of the past?
To gain a more thorough and complete understanding of past failures and “victories”. To plan against ‘counter-revolutionary’ strategies, tactics, evolution, and refinements. To hopefully engage in critique, thought, discourse, dialogue, and understanding with the goal of improving chances of success.
5. — What are the most significant challenges facing anarchists — and anarchism, as you understand it — in the present?
The vast remnants of statist, authoritarian, humanist ideology that still penetrate and replicate within anarchist thought. Apologism for anarchy. Hope.
6. — How would you characterize the present state of anarchist activity (outside the realm of theory and propaganda)?
Answer Provided: Very little is being done at all, aside from horizontal policing, enforced purity, street theatre, posturing, and bad faith arguments across sectarian lines. I’m deeply unimpressed with anarchists the world over.
7. — How would you characterize the present state of anarchist theory and propaganda?
Almost entirely boring, ineffectual, toothless, and brainless. There are some publishing projects that surprise me with how utterly irrelevant their entire catalog is to me. Insurrectionary thought has been taken to idiotic extremes with its implementation. North American Anarchists have almost all embraced the authoritarian ‘Social Justice’ and Marxism, and police everyone else in a joyless, limp, ideological fervor. Not all of anarchist thought is insufferable. Just most of it.
8. — What are the most urgent changes to be made in anarchist practice moving forward?
Answer Provided: If I were to prescribe anything it would have to be: Stop flailing about unstrategically. Stop policing each other. Stop getting arrested for stunts that achieve nothing. Start getting arrested for shit that is worth getting arrested for.
9. — What is the role of some kind of “anarchist unity” moving forward? What form could or should that unity take?
I’m against anarchist unity. No form at all. Gather your cells/affinity groups/potlucks and start being dangerous.
10. — What are the greatest needs with regard to new anarchist theory, propaganda, literature and art?
This is an interesting question. I won’t answer it though. Still, I appreciate it. It made me think.
11. — Do you currently identify with any particular anarchist current or tendency — and, if so, how do you characterize your position?
I don’t ‘identify’ with any position but I find great affinity with and love for the rejections and critiques within certain nihilist, pessimist, green-ish, individualist, illegalist, egoist, post-anarchist, and continental/post-structuralist spheres. My position is that we can’t win and that utopia/heaven/the rev is not a desirable outcome. To spread anarchy, chaos, and destruction is a worthwhile pursuit.
12. — What additional questions would it be useful to pose to a broad anarchist audience?
There are too many questions, big and small, to list them all. Here’s very few: If appealing to authority or duty is out the window, then why do you struggle? Do you honestly believe we can win and what does ‘victory’ mean to you?
13. — Would you be interested in participating in future surveys, perhaps addressing more specific elements of anarchist theory, practice and culture?