Anarchy: a journal of desire armed. #37, Summer 1993 LETTERS, part 2 @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ Anarchy and race? To whom it may concern, Does anyone out there in the anarchist movement know of anything at all concerning the concepts of `anarchy' and `race'? I am looking for anarchist approaches to issues of racial in/justice, anarchist theory which treats questions of race, writings by anarchists of color, historical accounts of anarchists of color, and related topics. I am mostly interested in what has happened and is happening in the U.S. I have been searching anarchist bookstores, reading anarchist periodicals, and asking people at anarchist coffeehouses and gatherings if anyone has any ideas, but I have very few leads so far. I have a book (very poorly written, I think) by Carolyn Ashbaugh called Lucy Parsons, and I have been told to read up on the early years of S.N.C.C. Otherwise people just shrug their shoulders and say "ask so-and-so." But the next so-and-so never knows anymore than the last so-and-so. Now I know that there are excuses, some more valid than others. I also know that for the most part anarchists' hearts are in the right place. However, I think that it is time to admit to ourselves and to each other - in public - that the anarchist movement in Europe, North America and even Latin America is overwhelmingly white: the activists are white, the theory is white, and our future will be white unless we do something to make it more colorful. I think that it is lazy and irresponsible of us (especially those of us who are white) to simply say "as anarchists we are against hierarchical relationships, and that obviously includes being opposed to the idea that one race is superior and another inferior" and leave it at that. Nor is it adequate to abstractly proclaim that "the struggle against (choose one: state, capital, megamachine, system, hegemony, technology, civilization, alienation....) is a struggle for all people of any and all races." I also don't think that it suffices to print a few short articles on the Black Panthers, the Mohawks or on any other non-white non- anarchist radicals. I am not against such efforts, I am merely saying that our efforts have not, as of yet, gone far enough. I would embarrassingly add that from what I can tell Marxists, feminists and liberals seem to be more successful in addressing these forms of racism within their movements than we are. As a modest beginning towards a more honestly multi-racial and multi-cultural anarchist movement, I would like to ask for an inclusionary discussion of anarchy and race. I would like people to write letters which share resources, experiences, knowledges, ideas, proposals and anything else which seems like it will help out. Please don't hesitate to point out something which may seem obvious to you - it may not be to me or someone else. I would hope that the character of such a discussion would be safe, supportive, and encouraging. Too often we viciously attack or attempt to intimidate each other instead of offering constructive criticism of our theories and actions. We should be able to admit mistakes, problems, and shortcomings, and it should be alright to ask for help. Sincerely yours foro a diverse anarchy, Eric, 180 Dakota Ave. #D Santa Cruz, CA. 95060 Being good To whom it may concern, Lev & folks, I have recently moved...I made the mistake of being good which, since I wanted to stay at maximum security resulted in my receiving a reward I did not want - transfer to lower security. Santa was checking his list and made me go. Please keep the journal coming to fill my days and years. I still leave 5 May 2008 and that is a Monday. In the meantime even in fascist razourwire land I still live Ammon Hennacy's "One Man Revolution" every day. Even in here they just have my body, the important part, my mind, is `free'! Tell your readers they are only free if they think free. Ask your `free' readers if they have thought `free' today. Society is `revolting' (you can say that again), Robt. Kim Walton, M.Ed. Box 1368-A175-ManCI Mans, OH. 44901 Ps. Lost my only pen-pal after ten years (an 85 yr. old nun in a car accident) enclosed is my Who's Who bio, post it for con- sideration, isolated is not my style. No romance or money desired just intelligent correspondence. "You wanna screw around?" Dear Jason & Toni, I hate to burden you with all this letter writing, but since your magazine is one of the very few venues by which accurate infor- mation and unorthodox opinions on intergenerational sex are able to see the light of day in this country, I feel obliged to make use of this opportunity, in hopes that it may improve the living conditions of someone, somewhere. I am writing in response to the letter from T., Baltimore, MD. [see Anarchy #34, page 79, "Right to rape"]. While one may be tempted to dismiss the letter, since it seems as if T. somehow read Joel Featherstone's article without any of its contents actually reaching his brain, it is clear that his beliefs are representative of those of a significant segment of the popu- lation, including those who are otherwise cool enough to read Anarchy, and that a good many others are uncertain what to think on this subject, which has probably received more unchallenged false reporting in the mainstream press than any other issue in the last ten years (I know there's plenty of competition for this distinction, but you'd be surprised what you'd find if you read enough about this stuff). It is primarily at these folks that my reply is aimed. T. is determined that very painful, negative experiences such as his own near-rape not be seen as benign or wanted by the child. He attacks Featherstone's article, convinced that it is merely a rationalization for rape, disguised by the term "positive child- adult sex." When he sees the sentence "No one doubts that negative child-adult sex occurs." & "No controversy exists regarding the fact of child sexual abuse...." he apparently misunderstands this to mean that the author is implying that we should doubt that negative child-adult sex occurs. Blinded by strong feelings (which I've had a lot of lately), he fails to see that what the author is saying is that there is more than one kind of child-adult sexual experience. The many works cited by Featherstone make it clear that there is indeed a very wide range of experiences, and that the majority do not, in fact, involve force. I should say that my own tentative conclusions from reading basic research are that a sexual experience will be negative when it involves force, coercion, or is preceded by strongly sex-negative teachings (this is true regardless of the ages of the participants, although the sex- negative teachings may gradually lose some of their effectiveness after a while), and it will not be strongly negative when these factors are not present. The positiveness of an experience depends on the amount of physical pleasure it imparts, and/or the degree of emotional fulfillment, which is usually the main factor in positive experiences. T. may be interested to know that the research cited by Featherstone strongly supports the statement "all (or at least virtually all) cases of forced sex between an adult and a child (or anyone else) are experienced negatively" and that there are, to my knowledge, no organizations that would disagree with this. As for "Child rapist fantasies about a desire for sex (or the possibility of it) on the part of the child...," well, anybody who was in the sixth grade when the ratings for "Charlie's Angels" peaked, should have no problem with the assertion that it is possible for a 12- year-old to desire sex with an adult. T. also lashes out at anyone who is attracted to young people. He uses the term `boy-love' to describe an attempted rape, perhaps not knowing that if the man had been a member of NAMBLA, his behavior would be grounds for expulsion, and that NAMBLA's position on age- of-consent laws includes a demand that children be given legal equality with adults, allowing them to retain attorneys, press charges, and file lawsuits without dependance on adults (it should be noted that most negative child-adult sex is not rape by a stranger, but coercive incest with a natural parent or step-parent, who, under US laws legally own their children and control their belongings and legal matters; the most traumatic cases of child- adult sex, with very serious long term effects, occur when the child is taught by one parent that sex is `bad', and then subjected to both coerced and forced sex with the other parent repeatedly, over a period of years; giving children freedom to choose where, and with whom, to live would be much more helpful than simply denouncing sex). His experience at the hands of a would-be child rapist lead him to conclude that attraction to children and im- pulses to rape must be connected, despite the fact that few women- rapers are attracted to children; and believe it or not few child rapists are either (researchers have known this for a long time, and they're just now starting to ask `why'). When you find someone attractive, typically the first thing that occurs to you is how to get on their good side, not how to traumatize them (!?). T. wonders what the adult is getting out of `child-sex', as if to imply that these relationships need to be more `profitable' than others, presumably to make up for the reduced value that he places on the lives of children. When you wonder "What makes someone attracted to children?" ask yourself "What made Fred attracted to Wilma?" "Betty to Barney?" "Me to my Lover?" When you figure it out, let me know. As to the cliche, quasi-marxist theory of "an insecurity which generates a need for unequal and oppressive power relations in their sex life": what sane American feels secure? What average-joe male has equal power relations in his sex-life? Why does the list of `boy-lovers' include: Akhenaten, Solon, Strato, Socrates, Plato, Alexander the Great, Trajan, Hadrian, Abu Nuwas, Leonardo Da Vinci, Michelangelo, Nicholas Udall, Christopher Marlowe, Shakespeare, Moliere, Byron, Whitman, Tchaikovsky, Wilde, Gide, Genet, John Henry Mackay, Bayard Rustin, Igal Roodenko, Keith Haring, Allen Ginsberg, William S. Burroughs, and Hakim Bey? T. says Featherstone's "`I-am-the-oppressed-pervert' rhetoric is overblown," and says "These people have fucked up my well-being not once, but twice." I don't want to make light of T.'s experience, but I must respond: I saw no such rhetoric in Featherstone's article, but his letter in @ #30, and the article by David Sonenschein in #34 offer some clues as to some of the forms this oppression takes. On a personal level, I haven't had any well being to speak of for about five years. Not being as fortunate as `unrepentant' (in the same issue), I'm not attracted to `adults' at all, but rather to 12-17-year-old boys. I've had one good sexual experience in my life, in high-school over ten years ago, and may not ever have another one. I have no intention of enduring this condition for a prolonged period, thus speculations as to my future are alas, highly speculative. I have left my home, family, `career', and the most beautiful small city in the country, in hopes of finding a place where I can get by ...no such luck yet. I've had about three good nights' sleep in the past year, and for about a four month stretch a while back, I was crying myself to sleep every single `overblown' night. I have used up lots of space already (explaining in plain language what would be obvious if not for two thousand years of church/state/media shit-blitz), and I don't want to displace any more "Jason Responds" (that's one of my favorite parts) so I'll wait for another issue to go into the thousands of people who are in prison for doing what I've been too scared to do: asking a kid politely, "you wanna screw around?" Peace and Love, D.M., San Francisco, CA. Patently bankrupt Dear editor, I'm glad to see Anarchy defending the rights of children to have sex with whoever they please and of adults the pleasure of enjoying children enjoying themselves sexually. I actually defended this thesis in front of all sorts of people before I found out that there was a journal dedicated to this idea (among many others), so I was happy to find out that I wasn't totally out of touch with reality. The most recent article on child-adult sexual relations, "On Having One's Research Seized," while exceedingly well-informed with the facts could have used some logic. (Oh, Gawd! Not that!) The `argument' that it gives for the anti-pedophilists (from David Finkelhor) is patently bankrupt. It basically reads like: sex with children is off-limits. Into this conclusion i've only been able to come up with two `arguments', each distinct from the other, though with the same conclusion: (1) Sex with children is off-limits because they aren't sexual creatures by definition and so can only be coerced into sex with anyone (including other minors). The problem with this is it begs the question. There isn't any argument and no facts which show that children aren't sexual creatures. In fact there is loads of evidence which points to exactly the opposite conclusion. (2) Sex is abhorrent enough an act with adults and so is even worse with children, who can do it for pleasure and don't have to worry about consequences. Unfortunately, as it turns out, certain pleasures aren't evil and I (and just about every other human being) take sex to be one of these. As for the consequence of not having any consequences from having sex: since the advent of contraception and abortion, humanity has known that heterosexual sex needn't have any sort of complicated results. Add to this that there is nothing wrong with homosexual sex, none of which results in pregnancy, and the stupidity (for that's what it amounts to) of the `argument' is so great that one wonders why some people sub- scribe to it. It's taking me a while to read this issue of Anarchy (#34/Fall '92), so I haven't gotten through to Zerzan's "Postscript to Future Primitive...." I doubt, though, that there's anything there that could possibly convince me of primitivism. I guess I'll take this time to apologize for writing that Zerzan should shut up or write for some other journal. My rhetoric faculty got out of hand. (Then again, if Hakim Bey can get away with suggesting that we ought to burn works by Andrea Dworkin....) I haven't really given all my arguments against "Future Primitive" (all my previous ones being a defense of an abstract human nature). Here's the knock-down argument against Zerzan thinking that one beginning of oppression was agriculture: we don't know how the early Christians lived in their daily goings-on and we actually have written documents from their time, so what makes Zerzan think that he knows how culture was before civilization? Basically Zerzan's speculating in the dark, much like the theologian considering the sorts of knowledge one might have in the next life. Thank you for your valuable time. Sincerely, G.T., Point-Claire, Qu=82bec Practicing revisionism Dear J.M., In your review of Confessions of a Holocaust Revisionist, you advised the readers of Anarchy to not waste money on the pamphlet. You also stated that "It's undeniable that `The Holocaust' has been magnified into a larger than life tale of historical racial persecution - largely in order to justify the continuing atrocities by Zionists in the racist state of Israel." I am not sure exactly what you mean by `undeniable' and "larger than life tale," but I do not find such sweeping statements convincing. You mentioned the suffering "of hundreds of thousands of people." I would say that it is undeniably more accurate to refer to the systematic killing of millions of people by the Nazis. By reducing it to a smaller than life suffering of a fraction of the number of people affected, you are practicing revisionism. Furthermore, one does not have to be a dupe of Zionist propaganda to acknowledge the true breadth of suffering in Nazi Germany and its relevance today. Israel has committed many atrocities, but it is preposterous to dismiss the extermination of millions of people because of what another nation is doing 50 years later. It is possible to disagree with the Zionist propaganda machine, and still see the relevance of past Nazi horrors to contemporary events. The fascist hatred of gays, Romanis (Gypsies), and other groups persecuted by the Nazis, in addition to Jews, has continued to this day. I was thankful to see a letter from Germany in the same issue (Fall '92) which mentioned the reality of rising fascism there. This has been all too easy to observe in the last few years. I was in Dresden last year at the time of a Nazi murder of a man from Mozambique. This year when I went back to perform theater in the same city I saw a march of hundreds of Neo-Nazis. When we went to Heidelberg, people had to guard the front entrance of the auton- omous center where we performed, due to previous attacks by the fascists. In particular, they were afraid something might happen because of our theater being well publicized as a gay play. Last week, a friend of mine was performing in one part of a cultural center in Germany, while the neo-Nazis attacked a disco in another part of the same building. Unfortunately, these stories have become all too common. Of course, this is not only a phenomenon within Germany. There have been numerous similar stories coming out of many other countries. The current rise in fascism poses many questions for anarchists, including how can we effectively fight this? Also, it is clear that governments use the fascist attacks to justify more police and repression. Today is the anniversary of Kristalnacht, a horrible evening more than fifty years ago with consequences for our times. Tonight there is an anti-racist demonstration here in Amsterdam (yes, racism continues to play a role in the `liberated' Nederlands), and there are many other actions around the world. The lead story in the European mainstream media today is about anarchists `ruining' a demonstration headed by Chancellor Kohl, President Von Weizsacker, and other German politicians who want to improve Germany's image in the eyes of the world. That is, the politicians want the image improved, while the anarchists demonstrated that Kohl and his cronies are a farce. The German government's decision to deport Romanians, and their scapegoating of these `darker' people testifies at the least the government's acquiescence to fascist demands, and at worst shows how the neo- Nazi thugs in the streets are merely a non-official wing of the prevailing, if unspoken, ideology. Of course, the New York Times and their cousins in Europe cannot fathom why people cried at the Kohl party because the media of record accepts and promotes the false sincerity of the government, and cannot tolerate anything that smells of anarchy. This is especially critical to them at a time when Germany's image is an underlying cornerstone in the creation of the United States of Europe. I cannot remember any act in the name of anarchy which has received so much attention in recent times (and soon probably acts of retaliation against radicals). I look forward to further discussions of such topics in the pages of Anarchy, which seem much more relevant and pressing than some undeniably `sappy', to quote your review, pamphlet on historical and hysterical revisionism. The sad reality is that the modern day Nazis deny the past Nazi atrocities as a method to deny their ideology, and gain support for themselves in their ongoing appalling quest for their perfect race. Groetjes (Greetings), M.W., Amsterdam, Netherlands Jason comments: No racists of any type It is true that some neo-Nazis have denied past Nazi atrocities in attempts to gain support from sympathetic (but more squeamish) racist elements, although just as many modern Nazis seem quite proud of claiming a heritage of racial atrocities. All in all I have no argument with your assessment of the situation in contem- porary Germany. I do have some problems with your reading of my very short and negative review of Confessions of a Holocaust Revisionist. I have no desire to minimize Nazi culpability for the atrocities they actually committed - which are legion. The statements you object to, in fact, do not imply that I want to "reduce...[`The Holocaust'] to a smaller than life" episode. What I do object to is the pervasive and very obvious use of this episode to serve Zionist propaganda purposes to the exclusion of a more balanced historical view. The propaganda version of "The Holocaust" indeed has "been magnified into a larger than life tale of historical racial perse- cution." As such it has served as a very effective prop for the ag- gressive defense of the racist state of Israel from effective criticism. To speak out clearly from a perspective critical of both Nazi atrocities and Israeli atrocities (and U.S., Japanese, Soviet, Chinese and Arab as well) requires that one not be taken in by their respective propaganda machines. It also requires that one not imagine that all anti-Zionists want to minimize Nazi atrocities, nor that criticisms of propaganda uses of "The Holocaust" necessarily involve an attempt to reduce its importance. Civilization is a child of catastrophe Dear Anarchy, [...] I particularly enjoyed John Zerzan's essay, "Future Primitive," in #33. I've been running across the same sources (re: lifestyles of the Paleolithic era) and coming to many of the same conclusions as he has. I have a slightly different hypothesis regarding the origin of civilization, however. There's quite a bit of evidence showing that about 17,000 to 10,000 years ago our planet was in turmoil. This was a period of mass species extinctions (most of the large mammals died out then), and the world's ocean levels rose by up to 300 feet during that time. This would no doubt have affected human populations drastically, as people tend to cluster around rivers and coastal areas. British astronomers Victor Clube and Bill Napier (The Cosmic Winter) suggest that this, and other catastrophic episodes in Earth history, might have been caused by cometary or meteor bombardments - which, they show, may be far more frequent than paleontologists and geologists have heretofore assumed. Shortly after this par- ticular episode, human beings began farming. A later bombardment episode (around 3000 B.C.E.) seems to correspond with the development of the repressive, bureaucratic state, the building of pyramids and temples, and the reappearance of sky-god religions among Indo-European and Semitic peoples. As Zerzan points out, anthropologists no longer think that Neolithic innovations in food production were the result of some inevitable evolutionary urge, since they carried so few benefits and entailed serious long-term costs. Rather, the emerging consensus is that farming was a response to overpopulation and environmental stress. Warfare (according to anthropological research carried out by Carol and Melvin Ember of Human Relations Area Files), like the need for agriculture, seems linked to natural disasters. The implication of all this is that civilization is a child of catastrophe. If the initial phases of civilization resulted from a kind of collective post-traumatic stress syndrome, then perhaps civilization itself represented a mechanism for re- traumatizing each new generation in order to preserve and regenerate its own psycho-social basis. I hope to develop this hypothesis in much more detail in the near future. In the meantime, I would welcome any comments from John Zerzan and Anarchy readers. Thanks and best wishes, R.H., Santa Rosa, CA. Defending the Left Green Network To the Editor, One could just ignore Max London's whining in "Slagging Off the Left Green Network" (Anarchy #34, Fall 1992) if he had continued (for some reason) to keep his targets anonymous. But near the end he names me and attributes statements to me that I did not say. To set the record straight: 1) I did not say that "anarchists who argued for direct action and not electoralism were splitters." I said that the conservative Greens in the Green Party Organizing Caucus/ Green Politics Net- work, which believes in electoralism divorced from direct action, were trying to split the Greens/ Green Party USA, which wants to combine direct and electoral action in one organization. 2) I did not say "unity is paramount." I did say that the kind of `party' (i.e. organization) the Green movement should have is one where the membership decides policy on both electoral and direct action, as opposed to a Green Party doing electoral action separated from a Green Movement doing direct action, which the conservative Greens have been advocating. And I said that we should not unite with electoralists who want to keep their `party' divorced from direct action. 3) I did not say that "this [attack on direct action] was consis- tent with the writings of Bakunin, Kropotkin, and Malatesta." I did say that Bakunin, Kropotkin, and Malatesta used the word `party' to refer to the anarchist movement in their writings. And I said anarchists should relate positively to this general sense of the word `party' and instead focus on the actual policies and practices of Green organizations. It is obvious from Max London's ill-informed jumping to conclusions that he doesn't have a clue about the internal debates and struggles in the Green movement. Nor does he grasp even the ABCs of confederal municipalism. London thinks confederal municipalism believes "the local state is good but the national state is bad." The direct democracy of a citizen's assembly is not a "local state" and a national confederation of citizen assemblies, linked by mandated, recallable, and rotating representatives, is not a "national state." The hierarchical rule of professional politicians, bureaucrats, and militarists is statist, whether they are in municipal, state or national office. Anarcho-communists like Kropotkin and Bookchin have always made the distinction between assemblyist and federalist forms and statist forms a basic tenet. And the anarchists in revolutionary movements that were able to begin to put these ideas into practice like the Paris Commune and the Spanish Revolution understood these distinctions. But a revolutionary social theory like confederal municipalism that tries to think through a way to apply anarchist precepts in today's concrete social and historical situation does not seem to be what London wants. He complains, for example, that Left Greens criticized capitalism as an `impersonal' system rather than personalized the issue as the evil people in the ruling class. London wants to reduce anarcho-communism to a few bumper stickers the good guys can shout at the bad guys. It is the simple-minded sloganeering and cynical sectarian sniping exhibited by London that lends credence to the cartoonish caricature of anarchism one finds in the capitalist and state- socialist press. It gives anarchist-communism a bad name among activists who want to build a popular radical movement rather than merely posture self-righteously in splendid isolation like some holier-than-thou Christian sect. If London had spoken up in the sessions he dismissed as "manipulative and authoritarian" instead of sulking off outside by himself, he might have begun to understand who and what he was dealing with at the Far West Left Green Network conference. Nobody stopped London from speaking up but himself. If he wants to go witch-hunting for authoritarians, he should start with a look in the mirror because it was only the internalized authority inside him, not so-called East Coast Left Green leaders, that stopped him from speaking up. Howie Hawkins, Syracuse, NY. A very sick warped man Jason, I have read the articles/letters by the `justified' child-abusers in yer paper. It is not that their "point of view" should not be printed...but then when are you going to start printing "points of view" of mass-murderers and rapists?? One letter, you print claims he was abused at home - then saved by a gov't worker just to be sexually exploited and then grows up to be an abuser himself - and at that a school teacher! A very sick warped man indeed. Then you print a piece by a so called `researcher' harassed by the gov't. By yer thinking Jeffrey Dahmer, Ted Bundy, etc. are also `justified' in their abuses of others - just cause "the gov't is against them." Such thinking is warped and has nothing to do with @. In @ I'll tell you what - such exploiters and abusers such as yer weasly pals in NAMBLA would be shot on the spot. Even now if I ran across any of them on the street - I'd beat the shit out of them. Period. You give @ a Bad Rap. A very Bad rap. You help the Gov't by doing so. I myself was a victim of such an abuser as a child, and I see this Abuse I as a product of church & state! Barrabbas, Mt. Ranch, CA. Ps. You like the Catholic Church are responsible for attempting to whitewash this issue. It is apparent where you stand on this - you sympathize with the James Porters of the world. Jason comments: Victimism has nothing to do with anarchy Just like many of the other types of self-professed `victims', you cannot seem to distinguish between consenting relationships and abusive ones, with the result that you advocate the most moralistic and authoritarian of `solutions' to a complex situation. I think most genuine anarchists understand that there is nothing libertar- ian in categorically denouncing any class of relationships which include both consenting and non-consenting, exploitative and non- exploitative instances. Your attempt to lump every such instance together regardless of particular conditions places you in a pecu- liarly nasty position of visiting threats of sexual repression and/ or death upon people whose only `crime' is that they engage in relationships with people you think are too young. The fact is that no one has said that anyone was ever `justified' in molesting you when you were younger. And as far as I'm aware, in these pages no one has ever said that anyone is ever so `justi- fied'. It seems to be quite clear and unanimous sentiment that non- consenting relationships are intolerable. Therefore you need not feel so threatened that what other people freely decide to do with each other is not what you would want to do. Children are not always and everywhere `victims'. There is no need for you to imitate (with children) the victimist ideologues who see women only as sexual victims when it comes to heterosexual relationships, and who therefore want to prohibit all heterosexual sex. Victimist ideologies have nothing to do with anarchy and everything to do with repression and authority. Those who feel uncomfortable with sexual freedom have no inherent `right' to visit that discomfort on the rest of us with prohibitions and threats. Anarchy requires the willingness to live in peace with an immense diversity of people engaged in an immense diversity of relatively freely chosen relationships. Vicarious military fling? Dear Jason, What are the real reasons that George Bush is getting us involved in Somalia? Is this one last vicarious military fling of an aged lame-duck President? Does this reflect the humanitarian limitations of a rich white Republican, i.e. the only way he can show compassion to another race is to invade their territory for their own good? Or is this the start of an American staging area for future armed adventures in the Persian Gulf area? Will the troops be home for Christmas...1993? Stay tuned for the next episode of U.S. Lone Ranger to the World and his trusty sidekick, U.N. Tonto. L.T., Madison, WI. Many were disturbed Anarchy, I am writing this letter in regard to your published debate in the anarchist community. While I am anti-bureaucratic, I would not define myself as an anarchist. Of course these days people call themselves anarchist who are anarchist-communist, syndicalist, or even supporters of the so-called free market. However I leave the theory to those who are more well read than I. Recently at meetings I attended at Intentional Futures before I became homeless, a disturbing issue came up. A young woman who had attended an anarchist convention in Ohio gave us a summary, and spoke of a debate on sexual relations. A discussion of sexual relations which has also been written about in the journal Anarchy. The discussion did not concern male-female sexual relations. The debate did not concern same sex, sexual relations. Instead the discussion focussed on adult-child sexual relations. According to our female fellow worker's report, many were dis- turbed that the issue was being discussed. A more accurate way of putting it, would be that many were disturbed that anyone in the movement would question whether or not this constitutes child abuse. I for one am surprised and disgusted. However perhaps I should not be surprised considering some who call themselves anarchist, also support the so called "free market," and "free trade agreement." How anyone in the anarchist or feminist community can see clearly the exploitation of women, and then question the abuse and exploitation of children, is beyond me. I would like to point out to Anarchy readers that children in Amerika are considered property. The reason psychological, physical, and sexual abuse of children are rampant in the United States, is directly related to the fact that children have no rights. Children are legally considered the property of their parents, to use as the parents see fit. This is why the fascists are obsessed with what they call "parental rights." Now we see the left becoming confused, not only with the granting of civil rights to children being the solution to child abuse, but as to what constitutes child abuse. The journal Anarchy is not alone in this. Several years ago there was a case of several children being sexually abused in a Los Angeles day care center. After days and weeks of testimony, the right wing jury decided the children's testimony was too incredible to be believed. This was in spite of clear medical evidence that the children had been sexually abused. The capitalist jury and judge then freed the defendants. Later a Trotskyist newspaper published an article calling the prosecution of the defendants an attack on women and minorities. The main defendants were the woman who ran the day care center and her son. Somehow the medical evidence was lost on both the jury, and the leftist journalist. This is not surprising considering that, our society has conditioned us, to always believe an adult, over a child. Some would call this ageism. My personal opinion is that any adults who have sexual relations with a child should be shot. I would also consider execution to be the correct way of dealing with anyone truly guilty of rape. Would the same anarchist who philosophizes over whether adult- child sexual relations are wrong, question whether rape is harmful to women? To a child, any adult is an authority figure. In Amerika, any adult is an authority figure with legal rights, over any child, none of whom have any legal rights. Is it possible that the anarchist movement has been infiltrated by authoritarian pedophiles, who wish to abuse anarchist children? Would the same `anarchist' who questions the reality of children's sexual abuse, question psychological physical abuse of children? Will Anarchy: A Journal of Desire Armed dare publish this letter? Time will tell. in solidarity, R.M., Seattle, WA. `Pedophiliocidal' Dear Anarchy, I am writing in response to your "unrepentant pedophile" of last Fall. Sir, First of all, I would like to apologize for what your mother (and society) did to you. Call me crazy but I don't think `mothers' who force their children to masturbate in front of them are exactly `sane'. Second, I want you to know that I am a 21 yr. old college student who is preparing to teach elementary school and I love children more than you ever will!! But I have the presence of mind not to misconstrue innocent affection for wanton sexuality. Hugs and kisses are completely innocuous when coming from a child and you have no right to say otherwise! I work with kids that come from good home situations and bad home situations, mostly bad. These children don't want sexual activity, they only want to be loved for who they are and your acquaintances are obviously not getting that at home. As I wrote the original copy of this letter, I was unavoidably salivating on the page because I am so angry I could puke, and you mark my words...if ever, ever find out who you are I will kill you, I swear to god, I'll fucking cut off your penis and shove it down your abusive throat!!!! It's people like you that damage my profession's name and make people like me want to just give up for fear of being wrongly accused. People like you cause children to think that affection =3D sex. I'm clenching my teeth so hard I'm giving myself a headache. You don't know what love is, you don't even know who you are!! But (as I relax my fist a bit) here's what you need to think about, you seem to be forgetting the most critical part of your childhood, which is not that these events occurred but how they made you feel at the time! Break the cycle man, break the shit out of it!! Pedophiliocidal, C.B., Lexington, KY. Ps. If you like comic books, try Night Cries (Batman series) hardover edition and Spawn #5. Keep the last page of Spawn in mind you bastard. [Due to the seeming inability of C.B. from Lexington, KY., Barrab- bas from Mt. Ranch, CA., and other examplars of the I-will-kill- people-who-don't-agree-with me school of letter writing to curb their tendency to make violent threats, we will no longer print letters which contain this type of intimidating language. It is my hope that these people get some help from their friends, and attempt to overcome their attraction to perverse violence, whether or not it is limited to such verbal threats. I don't think their words have any place in a forum such as this, and I have no desire to continue typing this type of shit. I would be happy to hear from readers concerning their opinions about this. -Jason] Independent state of Qwa-Ba-Diwa Dear Editor, I am writing to inform you and your readers of the declaration of the Independent State of Qwa-Ba-Diwa, which comprises the second largest old-growth rainforest in the World and nearly 3500km2 of land. This beautiful and rare ecosystem is being threatened with extinction at the hands of Big Business Clearcut Logging Companies. Since no treaty has ever been signed with the residing peoples, according to the British North America Act neither the Federal nor the Provincial Governments have legal jurisdiction there. The native peoples were expropriated from their land by the Police, for the State on behalf of Big Business. Now, since the Native peoples are faced with imminent annihilation, the result of genocidal policies enacted by the State, these people are returning from the concentration camp to their ancestral home. They have pledged non- violence, but they will not leave their home at any cost. Human Rights and Liberation organizations have been mobilized on the Island to help with the cause. We are now working on informing the international community of this issue which affects each of us. I will be joining my new people there soon to help defend the last 3% of old-growth remaining on a once overgrown island, the largest island in North America. Their society of which I am a part is matrilineal, communitarian and agrarian-based. Voluntary coop- eration and mutual aid are practised here where elsewhere they are only theories in a dreamer's mind. The struggle of the Qwa-Ba-Diwa and other Native peoples is allied to the struggle of oppressed peoples everywhere. Native Liberation movements are involved, the international media has been informed as with Amnesty Int'l and the General Secretary of the United Nations. Legally, we feel that this is an airtight case. However, with the Police, State, Media and Big Business interests at stake, we may see unjustified State-sanc- tioned violence against these people. We hope that we may be able to count on the support of the international community should violence of this type break out. By working on this we also hope to increase and strengthen the flow of aid between struggles, as we feel that the time has come to turn up the heat on the system which is designed to kill the planet. Organizations that one would never have seen together a year ago now recognize the fundamental contradiction of capitalism - unlimited growth from a finite source, and the lengths that the hegemonic groups are willing to go in order to preserve the order. They refuse to admit that capitalism is falling apart at the seams, but the people are reading between the lies and connecting the dots and are beginning to see what lies up ahead. We must bring our economies to a stabilized level, not sustainable development, but a sustainable system which is both non-capitalist and non-Statist, if we are to be able to look beyond the next 50 years. If you would like more information, or would like to lend a hand, contact: John Shafer Concerned Citizens for Aboriginal Rights 71 Menzies St. Victoria, B.C. V8V 2G3 Canada Independent State of Qwa-Ba-Diwa Terry DeLine #1203-850 Bidwell St. Vancouver, B.C. V6G 2J8 Canada Yours in the Unity of Struggle, S.D., Victoria, B.C. Amazing fluke Through an amazing fluke I received your #33 Summer issue. The censorship within Ohio's prisons (esp. here in Lancaster) is extensive, arbitrary and capricious: only what I expect from the State-Parent in its most evil form. Much thanks for the 'zine; excellent articles/letters and contacts. I especially appreciated the well-thought-out pieces by Zerzan, Perlman and Churchill, but I have one serious criticism- /question: where is the bibliography to back up Zerzan's citations? I have argued many of the same points he takes on, if only from an intuitiver `knowledge' of how life must have been prior to language/symbolism/civilization, and I want to be able to study these references of his myself to be able to back up my arguments when debating the `value' of the Progress Ethic. His article only deepened my thirst for new paradigms by which to view our culture's obvious instinct toward death and ecological suicide. Another piece which I agreed with was Feral Faun's "Insurgent Ferocity: The Playful Violence of Rebellion," though I probably have less opportunity to practice rebellion than those in the `free' world. Having lived under the total repression of prison for six years, I enthusiastically look forward to being a participant and helper in `monkeywrenching' the institutions of social control after my release. From within, I am forced to use their own system against them (legal) so have studied civil and constitutional law for the past four-and-a-half years. I have one suit completed and ready for filing in the 6th District Federal Court regarding the unrestrained censorship of antiauthoritarian/ alternative, religious (other than Christianity) and other underground liter- ature. It is an excellent suit and my family has paid for an attor- ney to help guide it through the court system: I am hoping to take it to the Nazi-fied Supreme Court where they will be forced into a political/moral dilemma over whether to follow the conservative party-line or whether to defend "freedom of speech" and uphold the First Amendment (which it is their sworn duty to do). I have already faced reprisals for my use of the "inmate grievance system" and now have a small-claims suit in a local court over their destruction of my personal property, loss of legal papers and confiscation of various letters/photos/etc. for no good reason. The best thing about being here is the perspective it gives one on the ruthless evil of our State and the true value of freedom (which 99% of the `pod-people' Zombies out there have no idea is being denied to them). They have the bullets and guns; we have only truth and the need for autonomy. Gandhi believed all you needed was truth: I have to take exception and add that it doesn't hurt to have some TOW missiles and C-4 and EMP-generators to destroy their communications and buildings, in order to begin to break their chains. Bob Black's letter "Type 3 Anarchy" was good (I just ordered The Abolition of Work from Last Gasp Press) but I haven't grasped what exactly Type 3 Anarchy is. It seems that most modern autonomists want to oppose every `system' or `organization', yet benefit from the structures they would see destroyed. Though I have embraced many concepts of anarchy, and consider myself a Freethinker opposed to all forms of external authority, I see the need for a consensual Synarchy as the transitional politics leading to a stateless society. Your publication stands out among all the undergrounds I've laid hands on. Please send me a copy of your Winter issue - which may or may not make it through the `screening' here - and Thank You for thinking of us prisoners. The Ohio Dept. of Rehab. & Corr. has already placed a ban on Overthrow (which I haven't seen an issue of since 1980!) and if they censor your pub I will include it in my suit. We're now setting it up as a Class Action suit and have over 20 books, magazines and tapes which they've censored. E.M., Lancaster, OH.