Hey folks, thought I'd share some of my thoughts on /r/anarchism and my place here. I've used this community for quite some time and have watched it cycle through many different forms, and have learned a great deal. Along the way, I've learned a great deal about anarchism itself, what is realistic and practicable online, and have some ideas as far as how to proceed from here. I am known for being longwinded but will do my best to be concise.

First: I must say that from all I have seen, democracy on Reddit is impossible. More specifically faceless anonymous consensus among thousands of individuals who will never meet is impossible with the tools that this website offers, and may more generally not be possible even with more tools. It may not even be desirable. The anonymity of this space, and the ease with which members come and go, differs it from any other social space that has existed in the human species considerably. People can say hurtful things, fake users can enter the space and derail things to serve a particular agenda, and arguments can get heated in ways that render this website more into a candy dispenser for the psychological gratification found in being "right" than in ways that are conducive to better discussion.

Meta was an experimental attempt to address this problem and perhaps perfect online democracy via Reddit. I've watched it for quite some time, and can say resoundingly that it did not work. The number of those who participated was far, far lower than the number of those who participated in /r/@, making meta essentially a bureaucratic technicality, a place to direct those with grievances. And wherever there are grievances online, a massive host of malcontents descend upon the space. Trolls, socks, flame wars, and mostly - individuals who crave conflict over bureaucratic trifles, and allow those trifles to broil in a messy stew of melodrama and ill-will. Who is behind the screen on these posts is a mystery, but one thing is certain: elements exist that are not good-faith posters; masters of discord ranging from /pol/ to the CIA have an endless supply of tactics that force any discussion about the ills of trolling into a rabid circle. It is for this reason that meta failed, that I tend to not indulge trolling behavior, and that inasmuch as I am concerned, meta has absolutely nothing to do with this community.

If democracy cannot work here, what do we do? So many anarchists are afflicted with an impulse toward idealism that is so strong, it obscures the nature of what they are working with. In fact, I think just the opposite must be done: begin with what is absolute, and depart from there, toward the creation of our own individualized ideals - this is anarchy.

In this case, what is is that Reddit is a hierarchically structured site. Those in positions of "power" (and I hesitate to call it that, since mods here are basically janitors and little else) must simply be benevolent and judicious individuals who make use of the community and have its interests at heart. The individual user is free to appraise this to their liking, and if it is not to their liking, they are free to leave and to start their own community elsewhere on Reddit or the internet - or better still, in real life (gasp). This has the ideology of markets and Plato written all over it - once again, this is structurally inherent, and if you don't like it, others are attempting [other projects](www.raddit.me) that seem [promising](www.och.org).

It is likely that any mod will find it egoistic to take the interests of the community into account in order to maintain a functional community and to facilitate its growth. This is the closest thing to accountability that the space can facilitate. And eventually, in this process, some will feel they must jump ship, with others being drawn into the fold here. I cannot change this.

Presently, some users have asked me to step down as a mod. I am skeptical of whom they are, as many seem to be newer users with a post history comprised largely of drama posts and trolling, and little actual content. Many also seem to be ideologically motivated: I am a post-leftist, and egoist, an illegalist, and a nihilist, and these wings of anarchism are notoriously heretical (I have even been lambasted as - god forbid! - "controversial"). I have arrived at these positions after many years of Bookchin (and subsequently, alcoholism). It is readily conceivable that in order to allow the more collectivist, moralist wings of anarchism to dominate the online presence of anarchists, I would stand in the way of that project. And I do. Legalistic conceptions of anarchy and existence sicken me. Promethean idealism is cancer to me. Cultish prodding and policing is antithetical to anarchy in my view. And because those elements are present here, I refuse to de-mod myself.

Call me bold, but the ways that political philosophies change are by controversial individuals forging alliances and mastering realpolitik, to expunge the dross and dead weight within their milieus. Currently, the "pan-anarchist" tendency is muddling the line. I do not love schisms or divides, but neither do I love the notion of anarchy being bent up in the shitshow that comes from hardline, faith-based religiosity and collectivist bludgeoning. These elements are in no way anarchist by any definition I have seen. Much to the ire of my enemies here, it far more resembles Maoism than anarchy.

To fully state my personal position: If egoism becomes the generalized point of departure for anarchy, and the left is fully slaughtered and left behind, we'll be better for it. The only communism that will not recreate an essentially Christian moral vision is a communism that begins with the individual ego. Communist tendencies that begin here are fundamentally anarchic. Again, this does not mean I support the censorship of those views, far from it - this is a discussion board, not a circle jerk - but I want to be fully clear with my position for the sake of clarity. Again, if it does not suit you, that I am so "controversial" (unlike the anarchist cohort of the last couple centuries - those pious, pious people like Emma Goldman, Renzo Novatore, and Ricardo Flores Magon), you may go elsewhere. Because I am able to maintain this position, I will do so, in service of the most wild and free conception of anarchy that exists.

Finally, on the petty and ridiculous accusations of my usage of gendered slurs, I point you toward my (heavily upvoted) comment describing precisely why I find what I said to be in no way unacceptable. I believe conflict is an essential force in anarchist politics, one not to be shied away from, and the endless battle to be as sanitized and inoffensive is not to be entangled with the quite reasonable effort to liberate ourselves from language that destroys people. My language, in saying "up in this bitch" likely harmed no one. If it did, I apologize.

thanks, and as has become the new way to sign off on tracts such as these, I'll say the magic words, death to america!

NV (stickied in response to the drama thread)