Read on Twitter
actions called for by anarchists / anti-state communists definitely mobilize ppl who aren't & don't agree w/anarchists or anti-state communists (as well as other anarchists & anti-state communists)...
just saw someone claim that organizing actions don't count as organizing b/c they're "self-selective" & only mobilize ppl who agree with "us." & often enough, that last part just isn't true. also, that poem of mine that ppl seem to appreciate...
(the one that ends you don't need or want / the people who you know / aren't "with you" to be / with you. really, you don't) rejects the idea that you have to convince ppl who don't agree with you to organize & act...
in fact, i wrote it to help myself & comrades focus on each other b/c "we" often find ourselves with people who aren't "with us."
also, i don't believe that what "we" think matters as much as a lot of ppl seem to believe, which is why i prefer to focus on the ppl i'm both "with" & with, rather than putting all my energy into making sure the ppl not "with 'us'" aren't with "us"...
i don't think "we" shld allow ppl who aren't "with us" to determine what "we" do. but conditions change in struggle & so do ppl. sometimes for the better, sometimes for the worse. & it's important imo to mentally leave room for those changes...
not saying i always have a good attitude about moving this way, but i try to.
but the thing some ppl do where they focus on appealing to the broadest possible group of ppl, i'm not down w/that. i do think it's important to be as loud & clear abt your position to reach ppl who are "with you." & if you alienate some ppl, well, that's probably for the best...
what i hope i'm getting at, in my clumsy way, in this thread is that, strangely, even when you're as loud & clear as you can be abt your position, you will not alienate everyone who's not "with you"...
a good example would be the anti-capitalist march during the general strike in oakland in 2011.
