Workshop proposals 2011: Crime & Anarchy

We image a world without the state and capitalism to be a more peaceful world than this one, but is this necessarily the case? What would crime look like if it were proportional, if it were human scale? What is the definition of crime in the absence of the state?

Today, anarchists are portrayed as violent criminals in the media. If they aren't breaking things at conventions they are on trial for one crime or another. At the same time pensions are robbed, people are murdered on the other side (and this side) of the world by agents of the state, and the disparity between the rich and poor is greater than ever. To put the question another way, there is crime against property on the one hand and crimes against life and life-potential on the other.

The 2011 Berkeley Anarchist Students of Theory And Research & Development invite you to participate in this years conference. It will be held on the UCB campus in sunny Berkeley CA on Sunday April 10th and the topic will be Anarchy & Crime. Please propose a workshop on the theory of anarchist crime, criminality, and how anarchists analyze and experience crime today & crime tomorrow.

10 - 10:50 am

Max Stirner developed a deep critique of reification and ideology, undermining every fixed idea. This critique was a monstrous crime against all ruling orders, in that he utterly demolished any basis for the sacred. I will attempt to show how he did this, and in the process share theoretical tools that we can use now for undermining the sacred in all its forms, thus also undermining ideological thinking and reification. In the process, I will talk about what Stirner was pointing to when he wrote of "ownness" and how he used the word "property" as these are important to this endeavor.

In this presentation I 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."

-Éile Henry address to the jury

Is the concept of crime useful at all for anarchists? If so, is it more useful as something to embrace because it is how the state defines elements which are against it? or is "crime" useful as a way to define actions that we don't like ie "politicians are criminals, state warfare is criminal"? If "crime", "guilt", and "innocence" are not useful concepts, how do we talk about our own anarchist systems of values and the consequences of transgressing them?

11 - 12:30 pm

12:30 - 1:30 pm

1:30 - 2:20 pm

"Democracy goes with everything. For champions of capitalism, democracy is inseparable from capitalism. For champions of socialism, democracy is inseparable from socialism. Democracy is even said to be inseparable from anarchism." We will take on this modern-day holy cow, discussing the history and progression of democracy as an idea, and why it is not a good pursuit of anarchists.

Reconceptualizing prisoner support Prison support is in a conceptual ghetto. Our desire to be nice to our friends who get arrested, and to get back to our lives when we've been arrested, has contributed to a dearth of options in how we consider people on the inside. This has meant both that we play into the hands of the system (hiring lawyers, pleading guilty, paying fines, etc-to beat them at their own game), and that we have accepted prison as the gulag that the system wants it to be.

What could be different? How are middle class fears and preconceptions getting in the way of rejecting how we think of prison (and how we understand the rest of society in comparison)? What would support look like if we took seriously the adage that we're all in prison, just some of us know it?

We will be discussing state law and social custom and exploring their overlaps and divergences. Is one a logical extentions of the other, is one the negation of the other, is it more complex than that? Further more we hope that this can be a jumping off point for a discussion that analyzes our relationships as anarchists to concepts of: society, justice, guilt, innocence, accountability, revenge, etc. Also we wonder what tools and methods we have for mediating conflict in this world (and presumably a stateless world) and are these means anarchist or not?

2:30 - 3:20 pm

The aim of this discussion will not be to level the clichécharges of postmodernism as anti-Enlightenment, antimodern, or relativist from a position which remains steadfast in its belief that systems of oppression are simply that, externalized systems to which the "revolutionary subject" can ostensibly be against. Instead, this discussion will endeavor to elucidate the ways in which there have been new attempts, albeit very few, to be critical of postmodernism without resorting to the reversion back into grand systems theories (i.e. orthodox Marxism and more traditional currents within anarchism such as platformism, anarcho-communism, and syndicalism).

From the Greek anti (against) and nomos (law), the Antinomians were people and groups who considered all laws as either irrelevant or bad in themselves. All penal laws court transgression and therefore cruelty & murder. --William Blake [I question the question!] Mention will be made of the philosopher Aristippus (died 356 bc), and the Cainites (gnostic dualists of the second century with interesting ideas about salvation: for instance no on is saved who has left any of the ten commandments unbroken.) In the medieval period we have the Brethren of the Free Spirit, the Assassins or Hashishim in the middle east, and the jewish "sin for the messiah" movement of Shabbatai Zevi. Finally we have the ranters in early modern england - unless we take a tangent with Blake...

What does innocence mean to anarchists? In the context of court cases, of arguing our cases, of casing the joint... does innocence have anything to do with being an anarchist?

3:30 - 4:20 pm

The abolition of crime is not the abolition of interpersonal (social) conflicts. Crime can't exist without laws, hierarchies and states, along with moralities, economic & political ideologies, penal institutions and, above all, institutions of forced labor--otherwise known as slavery. But interpersonal conflict will certainly always exist. What this conflict actually looks like under anarchy (as opposed to states), depends upon the type of anarchy we're speaking about, or what it is that we want to name under the title of "anarchy." This requires that we develop a fundamental, critical understanding of the nature of anarchy, society, the state and the institutions of slavery. Join us in a discussion on anarchy and modern slavery!

Hacking has a deep-seated relationship with the criminal world. From scams to social engineering, this presentation will cover how the digital world has allowed crime to flourish and how we as anarchists can benefit from this.

The presenters will give an overview and context of the situation in Seattle, followed by an analysis that will lead into discussion. The theoretical framework of the talk will loosely deal with the ideas of anarchist intervention and intermediary struggles. Overview: A timeline of anarchist events or events anarchists took part in (i.e. assemblies, demonstrations, actions, manifestations, etc.) Context: The murder of John T. Williams, the climate of Seattle (in relation to the SPD and liberalism/ RCP), anti-police activity in Spring 2010 compared to Winter/Spring 2011 Discussion: How can anarchists challenge the limiting discourse of anti-police "brutality" and single-issues of police violence? In what ways have anarchists been effective in the past in pushing struggles further and expanding tactics in the street and in what are ways to generalize anti-police sentiment? What place do anarchists have in engaging in a struggle dominated by leftists or reformists? How is identity used to discredit action (i.e. John T. William's brother)? How can anarchists forms of organizing not be limited to demonstrations, what are other possible directions? How have actions of solidarity been effective in heightening tensions and encouraging a certain trajectory? Is it strategic to push anti-police discourse toward anti-capitalist, anti-state discourse? In what way does the media play a role in repression, in the aftermath of anarchist action? What are responses to repression that further anarchist struggle and do not limit activity to "support"?

4:30 - 6 pm

Prepare to be amazed as anarchist teams compete for wonderful prizes.

Categories