Thoughts while listening to Utah Phillips

[desh]

conana (or anyone): How is organizing compatible with anarchy? If the point of organizing is to change the status quo, and if the status quo in this country is represented by laws and elected leaders, then what exactly do anarchists gain from action? (I know you can't answer for Utah Phillips (who voted!), but if you have a good answer, I'd love to hear it.)

jre (or anyone): How do I prioritize organizing? I think it's important that we fix this country. But I also think it's important that I move out of my mom's house. I want to get a job in Corporate America. I know I can do good while I have a job like that, but how much do I need to do? "All you can do" doesn't work for me. I'm busy and I'm lazy, and I don't know my true limits with this sort of thing. What is my obligation?

Everyone: I think I'm too susceptible to the rhetoric of the left. I agree with most of it, sure. But if someone disputes something I believe in while using the language of Utah, or of the queer community, or whatever, then I feel powerless. "How can I be right and you be wrong when you sound more like a folk song than I do?" Well, what should I do about that? Because it's not the case that anyone who talks like that is right.

rahaeli: Thanks for the idea.

Comments

[rahaeli.livejournal.com]

Welcome. I have a bunch of thoughts about the album; I need to organize them.

[below-the-belt.livejournal.com]

dude, i have a bunch of responses to that. organizing is totally compatible with anarchism/being an anarchist/holding anarchist ideals/whatevs. you work towards change.. doesn't mean you have to work within the system or that you have to work without. after midnight is not my time of most coherent thought but i would love to get together and jam with you about this.

as for the second question:
i'd be happy to talk to you about prioritizing organizing and finding a balance - everyone struggles with that, nobody who values social change thinks they're doing enough of it [as far as i know]. everyone feels guilty all the time. i'd be thrilled to talk to you about how to avoid this syndrome and avoid burnout at the same time.
and.. i'm sure this was tongue in cheek, but your obligation is as much as you can. so, in other words, you're not doing enough. does that make you feel better? yuck, i hate it. but basically you should figure out what kind of work feels good and useful to you [inside the system vs outside; trying to spend most of your time/earn your money through doing social change work vs working a job for money and then using that money responsibly/donating/whatever and/or spending your free time doing 'organizing work.'

and i totally agree, people can use what you refer to as 'the rhetoric of the left' and be talking complete shit. but if folks are using the language of the queer community [and i want you to listen to me and not ignore what i'm about to write - dispute if you want but do not ignore]: you must listen. if you don't identify as a queer, and you talking about queeritude, and the folks you're talking to are queers.. well, you'd better listen up good. respect those in oppressed groups, especially when you're talking about the oppression and experiences that they face that you don't. got it? i hope i never try to tell a poor person or a person of color about their experience because i don't know what it's like. i try to listen up good, ask respectful questions and not try to invalidate someone else's experience.. challenge my own assumptions.. etc.

and desh, i found the text message you sent me weeks ago after my mugging and i know i thanked you already but i'm thanking you again, it really warmed me.

[desh]

and.. i'm sure this was tongue in cheek, but your obligation is as much as you can.

It wasn't tongue-in-cheek. I don't know how much I can do. If you asked me if I had time for something else in my life, I'd say no. But this is too important to just say no to, but I don't know how much I need to give. How much of what my life is now I need to push aside for this.

but if folks are using the language of the queer community you must listen.

Of course I'll listen. I always listen. Thing is, though, queer people can be wrong, even though I'm not one of them. Of course I respect them/you, especially because it's an oppressed group and especially because I don't identify as a member of it. But I'm still allowed to disagree with what queer people say about queer issues. A followup question: How can I dispute something you say about queer stuff without you feeling like I'm disrespecting you?

It's hard for tone to come across online. We need to remember that. All of the questions I've asked in this comment and in the above entry are genuine, innocent-like questions. Not tongue-in-cheek, rhetorical, sarcastic, or assuming the opposite of what I asked. Even the anarchy one.

[below-the-belt.livejournal.com]

maybe i'm too new to lj for this, but i believe discussions like this are best in person.

...I don't know how much I need to give...
there is no right answer to this. there is no certain amount. if you want me [or someone else] to tell you how much money, how much time, how much sleep you need to give up... i/we will, i'm sure. but that would be a cop-out. i believe you need to figure that out for yourself, tough as it is.

How can I dispute something you say about queer stuff without you feeling like I'm disrespecting you?
i don't understand the context, i don't think. can you give me an example? and don't say marriage because you know how i feel about that bullshit. oh - and no, queer people are never wrong. about anything. that's where our magic comes from. ::grin::

[outcastspice.livejournal.com]

How can I be right and you be wrong when you sound more like a folk song than I do?
is now my MSN name :)

[desh]

Can I call you HCIBRAYBWWYSMLAFSTID for short?

[outcastspice.livejournal.com]

you can call me whatever you like :)

s

[conana.livejournal.com]

Sorry that this took so long. I set out to write an answer, and then had a lot of trouble organizing my amorphous thoughts into something that actually addresses the second part of your question to me. I still feel as though I am guessing a little what the subtext of the questions are; let me know if I miss the point.

I assume that the first question is basically "does not organizing contradict the premise of anarchism?" My point in pushing anarchism is almost always to be suspicious of big or centralized organizations. This might cause a problem if the goal were to win a federal election, but there is lots of good to be done by small organizations without the hierarchies that separate people from decisions and the effects of their actions. I read a book this week that describes some of the social movements of the 1960's losing their force precisely because they became large enough to lobby Washington, and monetary donations replaced more personal participation. So, yes, they are compatible. Organize volunteers. Ask them what they want to do, what sorts of actions would feel good. Learn about the problems together; dig up hidden information. Celebrate diversity.

I do not have any satisfactory answer to how we address the systemic problems of big government. It is one of these cases of the status-quo being so bad that improvements are easy, but that kind of improvement may not be enough. Basically, I am not even sure what roles I think federal and international government should have. I'd be happy to talk more about this, in a medium with a shorter feedback time.

As for action, though, I believe that anarchism has a role in deciding how we build the organizations that we want to have. I would be suspicious of an organization whose raison d'etre was achieving anarchism; that does come close to contradiction. But there are good reasons to pursue our other social values in non-hierarchic, decentralized fashions. Every example of constructive citizen action, rather than politicking, helps.