Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
The Need for Method
#1
source - sent by a friend

The Need for Method
by Zhachev

As the level of popular combativity to the ecological crisis develops across the world, the need for action and theoretical clarity in the anti-civilization milieu is posed more sharply than ever. It is important that groupings should show themselves capable of drawing up a balance sheet of what has been achieved in this domain during the last two decades, and of learning its lessons for the future.

The grouping of ecoextremists can no longer be left to chance. It demands a consistent method, based on openness to debate, combined with a rigorous defense of principle.

Such a method must avoid two dangers: on the one hand, that of falling into “debate for debate’s sake”, mere academic chatter, in which everyone says what they like without any concern to establish a dynamic towards common action; on the other hand, the illusion that it is possible to engage in common work on a technical basis, without first being clear on principles — principles which can only be determined by open debate.

Ecoextremists have a task to accomplish: the permanent destruction of mass industrial civilization and his-story itself. In carrying out this task, our agency is presently extremely limited. Ecoextremists therefore have a responsibility to intervene against the continued destruction of the wilderness, in order to defend nature, and to work for the end of society.

We should be in no doubt about the eventual purpose of this aggroupment, which is the formation of a decentralized and highly coordinated armed fighting force, the last one, without which a successful defense of nature against the state is an impossibility.

The work of aggroupment has several facets, related but distinct:

- the integration of individual ecoguerillas into decentralized, highly-coordinated groupings, since the very principle of the defense of nature is that of decentralize collective action on the basis of a common commitment to the end of civilization;

- the groups emerging in the periphery of the most difficult conditions of material deprivation and political isolation can only survive, and play their role in the worldwide attack on the state and civilization, if they can break out of their isolation and become part of a wider movement;

- finally, all ecodefenders, and above all what we may term the old groups (those with a direct historical role in the defense of nature in the past) have a responsibility to show the rest of us that there is a fundamental difference, a clear line, drawn between all those groups and organizations which stand firm on the defense of nature without compromise, and those groups, organizations, and parties who are committed to the principles of non-violence, which we oppose. In other words, the ecoextremists must clearly delimit and defend a holistic, naturalistic, pluralist anti-political milieu.

Zhachev
12/2018
Reply
#2
My friend hit a nerve with this one, as this is the only place on the Web it's stayed up. Hope to spread it far and wide.
Reply
#3
I've tried to give a basic theory with my book, Repent to the Primitive: https://www.wildwill.net/books/repent-to-the-primitive/

And I'm currently working on a "method" or strategy with The Rewilding Program: https://www.wildwill.net/blog/2018/11/25...-strategy/

Also writing summaries and reviews of books on radical political tactics. Here's a reading list: https://www.wildwill.net/blog/2018/11/26...ding-list/

Let me know what you think, especially The Rewilding Program. I honestly think that's the best path forward.
Reply
#4
Zhachev on a certain crap websites forum discussion:

Quote:I think prims like Jacobi, who seem just as busy figuring out how to destroy nature (the more graphic photos of animal skinning seem to have been removed) while at the same time as advocating a "program", like the one above, are very confused about how to deal with some of the knowledge they've acquired. It's a bit like Marxists talking about their programs for "the period of transition". My position is there's one globalized state apparatus now — as James Scott points, the state has been "modularized" and "exported around the world". So no one is going to do shit the global state doesn't want us to, without armed conflict that renders Leviathan and all its slimey appendages inert.
Reply
#5
https://www.scientificamerican.com/page/...018-rdquo/

I have a question for y'all about "doxxing".
In the BS world of "law" what is legal ?
Regardless of that, can we collectively enact simultaneous doxxing of known enemies on a large scale online ? Yes, For all to see.
Hoot
Reply
#6
(Sat, 15 Dec 2018 00:36:14 +0000, 12:36 AM)Hoot Wrote: https://www.scientificamerican.com/page/...018-rdquo/

  I have a question for y'all about "doxxing".
In the BS world of "law" what is legal ?
Regardless of that, can we collectively enact simultaneous doxxing of known enemies on a large scale online ?  Yes, For all to see.
Hoot

HUMINT is a thing, so is open-source intelligence. Even the US Army Asymmetrical Warfare Group is operating like a open-source mercenary group these days. Who cares about Uncle Sam. I'd gladly rot in a prison cell or worse over these fucks. But, nah, doxing is a neologism, so what you want to look out for is computer/wire fraud.
Reply
#7
Thanks,Demon
Looked into HUMINT a bit. Now is the time to figure out the "who's" and the "where's". Everybody knows somebody,that knows somebody who ,for example is security for "high rankers". Info leaks, no doubt. We won't be looking for specifics due to grudges, yet we may be looking more for "opportunities" in our area.
Hoot
Reply
#8
We're many years out from that sort of capability where I am.

What I think is most important right now is breaking our isolation. I need folks to have the capability to put together teams, first just 2 people, and then squads of (2 x 4) + 1 coordinator. I won't get into the deeper architecture of my proposals here.

In my opinion, this first special group is the foundation. 9 people, all specialists. A hybrid/joint operations section, if you will.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bar-Giora_(organization)
Reply
#9
(Wed, 12 Dec 2018 20:54:06 +0000, 08:54 PM)jacobi Wrote: I've tried to give a basic theory with my book, Repent to the Primitive: https://www.wildwill.net/books/repent-to-the-primitive/

And I'm currently working on a "method" or strategy with The Rewilding Program: https://www.wildwill.net/blog/2018/11/25...-strategy/

Also writing summaries and reviews of books on radical political tactics. Here's a reading list: https://www.wildwill.net/blog/2018/11/26...ding-list/

Let me know what you think, especially The Rewilding Program. I honestly think that's the best path forward.

I never thought I would see a dedication towards putting it back the way it should be like the works of Jacobi. The "Wild Will Project" is appreciated. The efforts put into your work, John are gratefully received.
 Maybe there's others like me that would like a guarantee on your legitimacy. Ain't gonna happen on the net though. We know to not trust the net completely. I look at your work 95% from 1 angle and 5% from another. I have reasons. Either way, there's good info to be had. Thank you. 
 
   Your writings put the perspective of rewilding as attainable. And this I'm sure gives many, like me,hope.
  There are other things that need to be mentioned on your site. Maintaining momentum during certain times is one of them. Hope to chat through your channels at some point.
                 Be healthy,
                          Hoot
Reply
#10
Y'alls concept of rewilding is nothing more than a fragmentation of Leviathan. Commitment to an abstraction as truly massive as rewilding is doctrinal and Confucian and will only lead to more other-control. Humans need to stop everything they're doing and submit to wild Nature completely. Else we should stop ourselves completely, and will.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)