Responding to claims I’ve been attempting anarchist entryism

The main claim of these posts is that I’ve been attempting anarchist and/or anticiv entryism, but it’s just not true. I am an anarchist who has been going to Earth First! gatherings since I was 17. I also accept anticiv anarchists and anprims as anarchist. I’ve just talked about desiring to have the effect of deprogramming some Ted K fans from their dogmatic beliefs like for example when some of them glorify the Cambodian genocide.

Deliberate bad faith misquoting

Quoting Ziq:

[Theo] criticizes animal rights activists who would “take the risk to slash slaughterhouse truck tires” as he “could never condone risking injury to people”.

Now here’s the source he’s deliberately misinterpreting:

Even if it could be argued that a war of terror, killing those involved in animal agriculture was the easiest route to reducing the number of animals bred into living horrible lives… I would still say it’s ethically wrong to be the person who takes another’s life just because it’s the easiest way. You could have worked to become president and outlawed it with one signature, you could have inspired a 1000 liberators to break every cage.

It’s an act of self-harm to treat life with such disregard when you could have been that same deluded person shrouded in the justificatory trappings of society treating your behaviour normally.

What I see is vegans in mourning for the animals, angry and wanting to find an outlet for that anger. After the vegan activist Regan Russell was killed, many ALF actions happened in response, and if taking the risk to slash slaughterhouse trucks’ tires in the dead of night is how you develop stronger bonds with a group of people and gain the confidence to do amazing things like travel the world and learn from other liberation struggles, then I’m all for it…

But, I don’t think the way we win today is treating a cold bureaucratic system with equally cold disregard in whose life we had the resources to be able to intimidate this week. Time on earth is the greatest gift people have, to make mistakes and learn from them, so I could never condone risking injury to people when fighting such a monolith as the animal agriculture industry today.[1]

So, the point about how I ‘could never condone risking injury to people’ is clearly in reference to a hypothetical ‘war of terror’. With the ‘slashing slaughterhouse tires’ actions I make clear I can easily see ways in which the actions could have a positive effect on the world and positive effect on activists lives, situations in which I’d be all for it.

I’ve also copy pasted the same example and sentiment into other essays:

Sabotage

We should chose targets which have caused people the most amount of misery, for which people can sympathise most, like the sabotaging of draft cards I wrote about at the beginning. So causing economic damage to affect material conditions and make a statement.

We also need to carefully consider the difference between property which is personal, luxury, private, government owned and co-operatively worker owned.

So, it could be seen as ethical to chose material targets of evil actors in order to cause economic damage and make a statement, so long as in the case of personal property, the item has no sentimental value and can be replaced because the person is wealthy. Or is a luxury item that was paid for through the exploitation of others labor. Or is private property, meaning the means of production which should be owned collectively anyway.

It’s an expression of wanting to find an outlet for legitimate anger against that which causes us suffering. For example, if taking the risk to slash slaughterhouse trucks’ tires in the dead of night is how you develop stronger bonds with a group of people and gain the confidence to do amazing things like travel the world and learn from other liberation struggles.[2]

There’s also nothing wrong with weighing the ethics of different hypothetical scenarios against each other in a video essay addressed to a general vegan audience:

“A war of terror, killing those involved in animal agriculture”
“worked to become president and outlawed it with one signature”
“inspired a 1000 liberators to break every cage.”

Obviously working to become president wouldn’t be anarchist, but neither in my mind would be an actual war of terror when there exists better options on the table that stand a better chance of saving lives. So, the president example still works for a general vegan audience as a hypothetical to say ‘if you think it’s justified to go this terror route, you’re not only discounting an anarchist strategy with no risk of innocent victims, you’re also discounting a 1000 potentially lesser evil scenarios where the burden of proof is on you that you needed to discount them to go this other route which we know for sure will lead to a lot of innocent victims.’

This was all just in the context of me desiring to talk about two weird ass neo-Nazi vegans, where a war of terror was exactly what they were advocating. Again here’s the news story I was covering:

The bizarre case of vegan Neo-Nazis & deprogramming vegans who glorify violence

Disrupting the pipeline

The two exposes are meant to lead you to believe I’m just some scared liberal who would faint at the sight of blood. That either I’ve always been opposed to ‘real anarchists of action’ or that I suddenly got scared one day learning about them.

A better clarifying timeline would have included events like the fact that I lived with an ex-anarchist who promoted misanthropic terror attacks and who died really young: a text dump on Jay

Baudrillard asserts that the explosion of the terrorist’s bomb causes an implosion of meaning, a gaping hole in the social fabric that power frantically seeks to cover in order to restore the tyranny of meaning.

I’ve written about trying to live in doubt and stay open to the value of any meaning people happen to take away from various events in life. I never claimed that being able to identify trends in the way some people travel down political rabbit holes to find simple answers to life’s questions was a perfect defeater to those political philosophies. I just find those situations interesting because I wish I could have pulled friends out from that situation, and hope to be able to do it for others.

They create pipeline quizzes to better learn how to draw people into luddite philosophy, I promote reading and debate them to disrupt the pipeline:

t-s-theo-slade-responding-to-claims-i-ve-been-atte-1.png

t-s-theo-slade-responding-to-claims-i-ve-been-atte-2.png

Transparency

It’s clearly stated on the front page of the ted k archive website that the project is in part simply attempting to fulfil a request made by one of the people Ted sent a mail bomb to, to just help bring more clarity to the foundations of many eco-terrorists political philosophy and the psychology of people who buy into it.

There’s also a long about this project page being incredibly transparent that’s linked at the top and the first item of the Introductory Texts page linked on the front page. Explanations of the admins pro-tech beliefs are pinned to the top of the twitter account for the website and pro-tech labels are tagged to the accounts of admins on discord.

I think part of the problem is some people were in a bubble because they just weren’t on any of the platforms where the website was getting positive feedback.

‘Hiding my power level’ & ‘deprogramming’

I’ve created anonymous accounts to join diehard ted k supporting spaces where they promote fascist reading material. I simply hide my warm feelings for the people working towards a pro-tech anarchist world, and it means I can gain entry into those spaces.

Then, I look to see for example what books and articles they enjoy reading most, then I upload some of those to the archive, either ‘as is’ or as a research text dump.

Then, I hope it encourages wider discussion, plus book and essay critiques of those books, which will hopefully have the effect of deprogramming some dogmatic people who were true believers in the goodness of their ideology based on false premises.

Pe No: Pol Pot was way more effective at society wide change. Everything was going good until war weary Vietnam invaded. Ted’s still better tho.

Anon: Here’s the most comprehensive textbook on the history:

https://weremember.gov.tr/documents/History-of-Democratic-Kampuchea-r.pdf

And I’ve added it to the archive for linking to specific chapters:

https://www.thetedkarchive.com/library/documentation-center-of-cambodia-a-history-of-democratic-kampuchea-1975-1979

Researching The Anarchist Library’s archiving ethos

I googled how to download a full list of web.archive.org URL’s for any website, then spreadsheeted the web.archive.org list of URLs of The Anarchist Library and sorted them against the live sitemap. This meant that I could see the list of texts that were once public on the library, but that have now been deleted.

I also quoted a publicly linked matrix chat for reasons librarians deleted and archived controversial texts, I hadn’t been gathering quotes for years, I just searched the matrix server I was in.

I then archived a collection of these deleted texts for people who are curious to read some of the texts that were deleted for unclear reasons or because the librarians thought they weren’t anarchist enough:

Here’s some of what I found out:

Most of the texts are saved to unlisted URLs so that they can be remembered by librarians and searched through in an ‘unpublished console’.
Often the reason given for deleting a text was just because it was discovered that the text had lots of OCR errors, so fell below quality standards. I found a few texts that I thought were worth the time fixing, so I fixed them, re-submitted them and one has already been re-published.
I agreed that some of the texts weren’t suited for the anarchist library, but I was glad to find them as I thought some of them were worthwhile archiving on other libraries.
I disagreed with some of the reasons for deleting texts given by librarians, but I found the reasons interesting nonetheless for understanding the library crew’s archiving ethos.

I was careful about shit like not publicly revealing lists of texts that authors requested be taken down. The quotes that I released were all useful for anyone wanting to understand what type of texts are likely included at a higher or lower rate. So, what type of texts it is better to go elsewhere to look for. Plus, librarians could simply offer updated reasons for archiving various texts, then the old reasons would be superfluous, they could be deleted and the librarians would be doing a great service.

I’ve never set out to find exploits in anyone’s websites. I was curious to compare the web.archive list of pages to the live list of texts on the library to see the history of texts that used to be live on the website, but that have been deleted.

Viewing historically listed URLs that happen to be ‘unlisted’ today does not make it someone’s digital device that I was trying to hack or exploit, it’s just ‘the public internet’; it’s just what various people who own web servers decided to make public and never made private. They showed a public way of accessing it, then sometimes website table of contents changes or whatever, but just because one page that linked to it no longer exists doesn’t mean that what they were linking to isn’t still the public internet.

If there’s a story on someone’s blog that they link to on another page on their blog, and that other blog page gets deleted, such that there’s no internal blog link to it anymore, but it’s still public; have I hacked them by going into web-archive.org to remember what the link is? Or is it only hacking if I didn’t know about it until I was curious to browse the web.archive.org for their site one day? Or can you recognize this is all so far removed from what comes to mind for every person when they think about hacking that you’re essentially talking shit?

Creating lots of sub-reddits

I like spreadsheeting lists of shit to de-stress, so I spreadsheeted a tonne of anarchist and vegan sub-reddits in order to create master lists of suggested anarchist and vegan sub-reddits.

As I was doing that I thought it might be nice to try and fill in the gaps of anarchist themed sub-reddits that didn’t already exist, so I created and am currently a moderator of this many subreddits (tho only 7 of them are currently above 100 members):[3]

Anarchist related: 74.
Misc.: 50.
Vegan related: 43.
Anti-tech related: 12.
Socialist related: 10.
Pro-tech related: 3.

Entryism is pretending to support an ideology and trying to redefine it to be something different whilst hiding within it.

Claiming branding real estate of ideologues I don’t like, making clear it’s a critique space and posting highly critical essays of said ideology is simply not entryism.

I’ve only ever requested one sub-reddit, it had been banned for 4 years and ziq admits he only ever set it up so other people couldn’t set it up. I think people have a right to a space outside of raddle, not controlled by it’s mods, to talk about their experiences on there, same way people on raddle have a space to talk about reddit.

The reason for why I moderate almost all of the sub-reddits I moderate is because I created them where nothing existed there before, so that anyone can start a discussion on them within a few seconds. I add a banner, icon, and sidebar to make them inviting discussion spaces for people to stumble on and join whereas they might never have found any discussion about the ideologies otherwise.

Anyone interested in moderating is welcome to reach out. I’ve handed out moderator roles at random in the past, which sometimes turned out to be a mistake—but I still don’t want to impose a strict process for new moderators. For example, on r/vegans, I invited many moderators from other vegan subreddits. At one point, someone shared a post linking to charities in Gaza. One mod removed it, I re-approved it, and then they rearranged the mod hierarchy to remove it again—since I had given everyone equal permissions and my account appeared inactive. That’s just how it goes sometimes.

The Zerzan transcript confusion

I sent the cleaned up transcript to Zerzan to get his approval, he read at least a long way down it as he corrected the name Adam Lanza. I just made a mistake trying to clean up a confusing sentence, full of ‘urm’s’. Which subrosa acknowledged at the time was a confusingly worded sentence:

Zerzan: yeah… I wouldn’t... uh... argue against it, I mean if thats… uh… It’s conceivable, and uh… I think that, you know, hunter-gatherer life was more gathering than hunting, but still… uh... maybe that would be more ideal, uh [...]”

Subrosa: I think Zerzan was struggling to form a full sentence here, emphasizing that is “more ideal” and “it’s conceivable” (given that hunter-gatherer life was more gathering than hunting), while also suggesting that it’s a bit hard to imagine (if you’re “trying to learn anything from the record” / “in terms of our evolution”. Whatever that means.)

The Ted K Archive is open to suggestions

Quoting a Ted K archive librarian:

If anyone’s interested in offering clear steps for ways they think the archive could be improved, feel free to let us know. Like how we decided to take the step of splitting off a bunch of texts to create The Library of Unconventional Lives. Or how we’ve tried to keep a record of controversial texts that were rejected, censored, accepted or deleted.

Obviously the archive is a niche project. The main task we’re happy about having achieved is simply creating parallel pages for every page on the Calif. Uni. website archive of UNABOM documents. So that it’s easier to search through the various documents:

The UNABOM Taskforce Documents & Their Typed Up Copies

And a thread was opened up on r/DebateAnarchism half a year ago to hear grievances and suggestions also:

The Ethics of Online Archive Curation

When do you think trolling goes too far?

Do you think the people who run The Ted K Archive ought make a long statement on its front page about the librarians being critical of Ted’s anti-tech ideas?
Do you think The Anarchist library ought make a statement on its front page about their library archiving ethos skewing more anti-civ?

The Anarchist Library relate to their project as ‘the og anti-civ project’ and their archiving ethos reflects that in how they reject archiving some anarchist texts critical of post-left, individualist and anti-civ strands of anarchism.[4]

At the time ‘The Anarchist Library’ was created I think ‘An Anarchist FAQ’ held a lot of sway which was an anarcho-syndycalist project.

So, as far as I’m aware, ‘The Anarchist Library’ was chosen as a name partly to troll social-anarchists by claiming to have ‘the’ best collection of anarchist reading when the collection of texts they approve is biased in favor of individualist and anti-civ texts over social-anarchist texts.

Personally, I don’t believe The Ted K Archive is obligated to make any statement about their left-anarchist archiving ethos on its front page as:

Trolling Ted K fans is infinitely funnier and more deserved than what T@L has done in trolling social anarchists.
Like T@L’s relationship to social anarchism, the TKA isn’t 100% antagonistic to all Ted’s ideas. I recognize Ted has some good critiques of the average psychology of both left and right wing people. And so the usefulness in forming smaller groups with different objectives to the entire left-wing or the entire right-wing, optics be dammed.

I just see the value in small far-left groups helping draw people over to a radically different world over a long period of time by agitating from the radical fringe. So, making centre-left policies look more reasonable in comparison to centrist politics, then the tried and tested policies of the future, then far-left, then far-left and anarchist.
The Ted K Archive is a pretty neutral sounding name e.g. The Ted Kaczynski Papers is also pretty neutral sounding, which is the name of a university archive that wasn’t created for the purpose of supporting Ted’s ideology. The head archivist Julie Herrada is likely a left-anarchist who enjoyed painstakingly archiving and cataloguing a collection of texts related to Ted.
The Ted K Archive aims to serve a similar role to the existence of other archives dedicated to tragic events e.g. 9/11. Ideally, a 9/11 memorial archive would include documents on (a) the terrible harm to families and firefighters as the long-term victims of that attack, as well as (b) documents explaining the grievance narratives of the perpetrators, such as documents on imperialist wars, intelligence agency tricks, extractive corporations, etc. Plus, (c) documents on actions that could be pursued going forward, to try to reduce the likelihood of similar tragic events happening again.

So, with regards to Ted, archivists see part of the solution to reducing the emergence of similarly alienated people like Ted as; agitating for rewilding at least 50% of the world, boycotting animal agriculture and living a minimum viable use tech lifestyle to partly provide this incentive, plus forming housing and worker co-ops for kids general well being growing up.
One goal that motivates me to archive texts related to Ted is wishing I lived in a world where a lot more people desired to live an ascetic low-impact lifestyle, like living part of the year in a cabin in the woods, so the fact that that desire is tied up with Ted in the public’s imagination means that it feels worthwhile to explore what all Ted’s motivations were. So that I can separate my own desires from his and be able to explain that well to people.

Plus, more than just caring about explaining to people, I use Ted as a way of really thinking through why various people are attracted to that life and sorting out the interesting motivations, from the more juvenile and cruel, learning to spot the signs of that in others, and so hopefully forming cool connections over my lifetime with that knowledge.

I want to see luddite clubs flourishing that have to do with using tech sparingly, according to a metric like minimum viable usefulness. So, in forming the groups and connections I want to see in the world, I feel like it’s useful to work out how to best disambiguate those ideas from anti-tech people’s projects.

Finally, just because I can’t instantly know at a glance whether someone will be an interesting or reactionary person, doesn’t mean it isn’t worth exploring various philosophies and psychologies deeply so that I can tell in conversations with people sooner rather than later if I hadn’t done that reading.

I think it comes down to if you’re principally against trolling or not, plus what side you’re on. If you’re anti-civ and fine with trolling, you like what they did. If you’re for left-anarchism and fine with trolling, you like what The Ted K Archive is up to.

Fundamentally, some librarians enjoy their anti-civ opinion coming under the heading of ‘The Anarchist Library’ and the divisiveness this brings. Popular anarchist opinion would lead to different anarchist texts being published, they could have chosen to set up a website called ‘An Anti-Civ Anarchist Archive’.

That isn’t to say the majority opinion would definitely be better, it’s just interesting how higher population levels of expertise with tech would likely enable someone to come along and fulfill a desire of many readers for a version of T@L that lived up to principles that T@L don’t desire to. Plus, then T@L wouldn’t have to experience as many people questioning their divinely ordained precedents.

When the Ted K archive was created a dude cried ‘why are you besmirching a brave anarchist prisoner of war’ instead of ‘sad it promotes some critiques of anticiv ideology also, but I get the whole Ted K sucks thing’. It’s clarifying amusing polarisation.

If the most objectionable aspect to Ted K was his terrorism why not just critique Ted’s justification for using terrorism?

Because being able to have the debate at the motivating foundation of people’s philosophy is important because even if I were able to argue someone out of the justification that it’s ok to use terroristic means in x circumstance, because of y secondary practical reason, the next day they could just double down on their foundational philosophy, that that sacrifice needs to be made for the philosophy to flourish.
Because I like the arguments against a lot of his ideas, so why would I aim only for such a small change? By winning someone over to a bunch of arguments, you can sometimes get them to see the value of a very different life and future. I think more people being invested in high-tech culturally-complex society means getting to experience more people expressing what motivates them in complex ways.

So, I often argue the best counter-ideal that I think it’s possible to argue for. And obviously any runner-up prize from winning someone over to the merits of that ideal is great too, like just encouraging a few extremists to drop their justifications for terrorism, just encouraging a few people to be a bit more anti-authoritarian, just a bit more leftist/egalitarian and/or just a bit less dogmatically anti-tech.

Appendices

Text #1 I’m responding to

Title: The Ted K Archive

Source: <raddle.me/f/lobby/177748/the-ted-k-archive>

Submitted by subrosa on Nov 15 2023 in lobby

About two years ago Ishkah got very worried about people getting lost down the eco-purist rabbit hole!.

Prepared with a graph, Ishkah came to explain how eco-extremism amounts to taking pleasure in terrorizing people, and how the path away from all this horrifying nihilism is to dig your way back to reality. Meaning away from anti-tech revolutionaries as they would still take pleasure in terrorizing symbols of technological progress. Then, away from primitivists and anti-civ preppers as those groups are waiting for a Mad Max scenario to unfold. Away from the vulgar insurrectionists who want to seize control and find each other by shooting cops. And away from all the other nutty fringe ideologies until you finally arrive back at the surface again. The surface being libertarian socialism of course. And sometimes, social anarchism.

The larger text here is Disrupting the purist anarchist pipeline (itself apparently a chapter of the “Ultimate Ted Kaczynski Research Document”) which critiques many dangerous tendencies — and suggests possible ideologies for the task of “disrupting a person’s journey down the pipeline.”

Ishkah then created about 100 subreddits to cover every possible anarchism, every related practice and interest that came to mind. To make sure ex-primitivists can share their stories on r/exprim (for something like r/exjw I imagine), and to make sure that r/AntiCiv will be a debate subreddit open to all perspectives and points of view, with pro-tech Ishkah as moderator.

Around that same time, Ishkah reached out to John Zerzan to ask for an interview to be published on their youtube channel. When the transcript got posted to anarchistnews.org, a user noted that

[Zerzan’s] lack on knowledge was disappointing. That Zerzan would so confidently state that “hunter-gatherer life was more hunting than gathering” is laughably incorrect and perhaps shows the sources he studied are literally decades old.

Once pointed out the Zerzan actually said the exact opposite, Ishkah insisted

I didn’t mess up, I’m 90% confident he meant to say hunting not gathering and just didn’t realise he said it wrong.

Despite it not making any sense in the context of the conversation. [Since then conceded, Ishkah corrected the transcript.]

Ishkah is behind The Ted K Archive, which very recently celebrated its one year anniversary. According to the announcement, among its other successes the library celebrates having archived...

Documents analyzing the effect [Ted Kaczynski] had on the public’s understanding of radical environmentalists, anarchists, terrorists, criminals, the mentally ill & simple mental neurodivergence.

And the pro-tech people of this library are hoping that...

the website will continue to draw people in with similar politics to him and similar mental health issues frankly. Then for the cold hard reality of the primary source reading material, the epic-ness of the suggested reading material and the inviting discussion spaces connected to the website, to all have a deprogramming effect and be a mental health support.

Further down in the anniversary announcement The Ted K Archive recommends a number of “guides to Ted K and his philosophy”. The first link leads to a transcript of a youtube video from the true crime / mystery channel Unpredictable. While the fifth link leads to A Quick and Dirty Critique of Primitivist & Anti-Civ Thought, just in case we imagined we’re talking about Ted Kaczynksi specifically. To be sure, the deprogramming and mental health support is to be provided to anyone not already on board with pro-tech social anarchism.

For this and for other reasons that I probably shouldn’t share, I need to say I have very little respect and even less patience for the Ted Kaczynski spamming on raddle.me.

Text #2 I’m responding to

Title: Theo Slade — A Snake in the Grass

Source: <raddle.me/wiki/theo_slade_ishkah>

Author: ziq

Date: 2025/08/25

I want to talk to you about Theo Slade, also known as Theodopodopodus, Ishkah, WildVirtue, ZonkerStout, and dozens of other monickers. He’s the person behind the Ted K Archive, thelul.org, StealThisWiki, the ActivistJournies Wordpress, the Ishkah Youtube channel and a giant assortment of anarchist subreddits which he has steadily seized control{1} of over the years for reasons that this expose will make clear.

In his essays, he admits he has been infiltrating anarchist events and platforms, including going to Earth First! gatherings for years in order to “deprogram” anarchists from having “dogmatic beliefs”.{2} For example, he claims anarchists he worked to “save” were “promoting the Cambodian genocide”,{3} which is a ridiculous fantasy of his own concoction, but nonetheless allows him to claim a moral high ground, pretending he’s working to rid the world of imaginary genocidal anarchist tyrants who, he insists, want to create Pol Pot-style communist dictatorships to commit mass-murder.

He squats subreddits of philosophies he abhors, such as r/anticiv, r/EgoistCommunism and r/AnarchistNihilism in order to continue this malicious agenda.{4} In his many, many essays, he describes openly how he “trolls” anarchists by occupying our spaces, seeding them with his liberal ideology, which he explains corrects our “delusions”. He calls this self-admitted trolling a “long running joke” that he plays on us.

To be clear: He doesn’t admit openly to being a liberal. He identifies as a “big tent libertarian socialist with the expertise to build democratic institutions”,{5} but make no mistake — every ideological position he holds completely conflicts with anarchy.

He also squats the subreddits for Hindu anarchism, Islamic anarchism and indigenous anarchism, among others, despite having no affiliation with those identities as a white man.{6}

His often-repeated goal is to rid the world of “extremist” anarchists, and his methods for achieving this include stalking them, gathering troves of data on them, surreptitiously logging their conversations and finding exploits in their websites to compile yet more data on them and their activities,{7} which he publishes to his various websites. He then links to his creepy adventures in spycraft on anarchist platforms in order to gloat and mock us. This is quite obviously the behavior of an informant, or snitch, even if he only does it for his own amusement, which is highly unlikely given his eagerness to “expose” people he repeatedly calls “criminals”, “Satanist death cultists” and “terrorists” but who are almost always simply insurrectionist, post-left, green, egoist, indigenous, mutualist and nihilist anarchists who are guilty of nothing more than holding philosophical views he disagrees with.{8}

His one-man war against theanarchistlibrary.org and its librarians should tell you all you need to know about his unscrupulous character. He spent years logging the correspondences and activities of the librarians and then published it all on his own library, and then berated the librarians when they asked him to remove their private messages and to respect their privacy.{9}

He often claims to be an anarchist when he’s busy gnawing away at our defenses, trying to convince us to buy what he’s selling, but in his essays he can’t help boasting about his actual inclinations. He says he sees anarchy as part of a “big tent socialism” to advocate for “workplace democracy”, but this milquetoast interpretation of anarchy is only a front for him to spread his retrogressive, establishment ideology and harass anarchists of all stripes, from hard-working mutualist librarians to elderly green anarchist writers and anyone inbetween who won’t fall in line with his program to “deradicalize” anarchy.

The latest subreddit he’s added to his immense collection is r/raddle — a subreddit I made to promote the raddle.me forum I founded, before he petitioned the reddit admins to hand control of it over to him. He has refused to return it, and already it’s being used, with his jubilant approval, by a dangerous stalker to smear and harass one of the anarchists who worked on the Raddle project before being forced to leave due to said stalker.{10}

His mission statement for the Ted K. Archive is to analyze “mentally ill” and “neurodiverse” people, including “environmentalists, anarchists, terrorists and criminals” and present them with literature he claims will act as “mental health support” and have a “deprogramming effect” on them. Yes, really.{11}

He uses the Ted Kaczynski name for his library because he believes it gives his project some sort of pedigree, but also allows him to basely conflate anarchism with Kaczynski, also known as the Unabomber. Of course, Kaczynski was ardently against anarchism and vocally advocated for an authoritarian government, but facts have never stopped Slade from pursuing his agenda.{12}

In his essays, he repeatedly conflates multiple forms of anarchy with authoritarian constructs that have no relation to anarchy in order to attack the philosophy and present it as terroristic and criminal and the domain of “mentally ill” miscreants and “Satanists”. By depicting anarchy as a menace to society, he attempts to present himself as someone who can rescue the world from the dangerously insane anarchist criminals who “take pleasure in terrorizing people”.

When he convinced renowned anarchist author John Zerzan to sit down for an interview, Slade proceeded to mis-quote Zerzan in the transcript in order to tarnish his ideas. When it was pointed out that Zerzan actually said the direct opposite of what Slade had transcribed, Slade doubled down, insisting Zerzan must have misspoke and he was simply correcting the transcript to say what Zerzan must have intended to say. After much protest, Slade quietly corrected the transcript.{13} This willful misrepresentation, going as far as re-writing an interview transcript with an anarchist who has made his positions clear for decades, is the perfect example of Slade’s duplicity.

The notion that we’re mentally unfit to participate in society and need to be saved from our disgusting criminal ways by the great Theo Slade, is astonishingly patronizing. His attempts to “deradicalize extremists” by attracting anarchists to his various coercive projects and then persuading us to read supposedly pacifying literature that promotes passive resistance and working within the system to affect change through “democratic means” perfectly encapsulates his conservative (and highly ableist) ideas.

In his magnum opus, Slade talks about “disrupting the purist anarchist pipeline”, which he says leads to “more and more fringe ideologies”. In this essay, he talks about anarchy as a pipeline to far-right ideology, slavery and white supremacy. He equates anarchy with a thirst for blood, a “violent hatred for all things unnatural”. In another piece, he calls the egalitarian freedom anarchists pursue a “deluded” notion. He then accuses anarchists of wanting to “take away modern people’s positive liberties”, before insisting that anarchists want to “bomb society back to the stone age”. His irrational fear of anarchists is really something to behold, and he’s often able to disguise it as a “critique” of “fake” or “extreme” or “violent” anarchists when he addresses an audience that isn’t familiar with his history of unprovoked attacks on anarchists of all stripes.

It’s always disheartening for me to watch anarchists ready to believe he’s only after the “bad” anarchists and would never inflict damage on them when he uses emotive phrases like “conspiracy nuts”, “terrorists”, “deranged lunatics“ and “criminals” to describe many of the good people he targets.

Further down in the Purist Anarchist Pipeline essay, he claims to support a “libertarian socialist revolution” while opposing “a vulgar anarchist insurrection”, which he illustrates with a crude diagram showing his opposition to violence towards police officers, the movie Mad Max, people who wish to live in “small communities” (??) and people “terrorizing symbols of technological progress”, by which I assume he means Apple Stores, banks, Amazon warehouses and Tesla dealerships.

These can only be seen as the ravings of a frightened conservative who is willing to pour years of his life into “reprogramming” anarchists so we stop resisting the cruel systems of authority that surround us and instead work to preserve the status quo that obviously serves him so well.

He then proceeds to attack the brilliant anarchist essay “bolo’bolo” for being opposed to “humanist, liberal and democratic laws and the state that enforces them”{14}. Yes, this supposed “libertarian socialist” won’t tolerate anyone writing against states imposing their rule of law. He insists an anti-state philosophy would “terrorize whole regions or continents, as the Huns or Vikings did. Freedom and adventure, generalized terrorism, the law of the club, raids, tribal wars, vendettas, plundering — everything goes.”{15}

These statements are honestly indistinguishable from a Fox News commenter trying to spread panic about Antifa, but here we are. He goes on to tarnish the anarchist proposal for Temporary Autonomous Zones, claiming they enable “fascist creep” by rejecting “humanism, the Enlightenment tradition, and democracy”. He decries the “racist position of Stirnerism” (egoism) and condemns the “nihilist and insurrectionary theories” of post-left anarchism, then in a further attempt to associate anarchy with fascism, quotes Bonnano saying “Hurry comrade, shoot the policeman, the judge, the boss”, insinuating this is the definition of fascism.{16}

He then condemns an Italian anarchist group for calling for “fires against capital everywhere”. Finally, he chides an anarchist he says attacked a nuclear CEO, saying the anarchist was “spreading fear” and sabotaging that corporation’s ambitions, before defending that industry. These ideological statements couldn’t be clearer — he’s so disgusted by the idea of violence against the system because he is the system. Part and parcel. This is not someone who only hates “lifestylists” or “individualists” or people he deems “anti-democratic”. This is a man who abhors anarchism in all its guises and has seemingly dedicated his life to eradicating it.

It’s quite an accomplishment that this person has taken control of 200 (!) subreddits, that he operates multiple online libraries that purport to be set up for anarchists by anarchists, but instead strive to debunk anarchy and promote his demonstrably conservative views.

He is a devious little man who has spent untold hours harassing anarchist librarians and publishers, which includes compiling and releasing troves of their private correspondences against their will. He’s a proud informant who takes pleasure in violating the privacy of dedicated volunteers and publicizing these logs for all to see, obviously including law enforcement.

He’s a coercive manipulative creep who works tirelessly to destroy the security culture of anarchists around the world. He’s an entryist who possesses such an ego that he can’t even bring himself to deny his intentions and gleefully describes how he bamboozles people into consuming his propaganda in an attempt to “rescue them” from dangerous radical thought.{17} He sees anarchists as mentally ill criminals and terrorists in need of de-radicalization. He perceives the state and its laws as the only obstacle separating Western civilization from barbarism. He defends the police and CEOs, he co-opts marginalized identities to colonize their spaces, he sabotages and hijacks anarchist projects and claims ownership over other people’s hard work.

There’s no reason to ever entertain his games, contribute to his projects or enable his attacks on anarchy. He is, in every sense, a snake in the grass. Don’t fall for it. Don’t let him lie to you and convince you his long list of projects are meant to promote anarchy or any kind of subversive, radical thought. Don’t let him use our spaces to concoct his nasty campaigns against good people. He is not an anarchist in any way, shape or form.

Follows is a list of some of the subreddits he controls with his many reddit accounts (WildVirtue, IshkahYT, ZonkerStout, etc) so you know I’m not exaggerating.

r/OrderOfTheGoodDeath
r/DebateSocialism
r/andykaufman
r/LeftAnarchism
r/AskAMortician
r/Vegans
r/classwar
r/AnimalRightsActivism
r/SolarPunkAnarchism
r/DebateAMeatEater
r/AileenWuornos
r/CringyAntiVegans
r/IndigenousAnarchism
r/EarthFirstNetwork
r/IntelexualMedia
r/Reducetarianism
r/veganPhilosophy
r/Yippie
r/LibraryInfoExchange
r/DudeistPhilosophy
r/Platformist_Anarchism
r/abasleciel
r/ExExVegan
r/Makhnovism
r/AntiCiv
r/AngelaDavis
r/IndependenceAnarchism
r/MinimalistAnarchism
r/LeftRothbardianism
r/PhilosophicalAnarchy
r/ContemporaryAnarchism
r/PragmaticVeganism
r/AnarchistLibrary
r/Classical_Anarchism
r/PopCultureDetective
r/VeganvsMeatEater
r/SaintAndrewism
r/AntiColonialAnarchism
r/AnarchistLibraries
r/WorkersInternational
r/AnarchismPlusNihilism
r/Raddle
r/TaraMooknee
r/AbsurdistAnarchism
r/CommunalistLibrary
r/AnarchoIndependentism
r/AntiReligiousAnarchy
r/VeganPurists
r/VeganAdvocacy
r/Bookchin
r/RadicalLibraries
r/HinduAnarchism
r/IslamicAnarchism
r/AntiVegans
r/RadicalAnthropology
r/AfterDeathLegalReform
r/IAF
r/AtheisticAnarchism
r/BreadBooks
r/AnarchistFederation
r/InsaneVegans
r/ShitCarnistsSay
r/ZoeBaker
r/TheGrayzone
r/EiselMazard
r/VegansofFreegle
r/excarnists
r/ExAntiVegan
r/ExCarnist
r/ToastTube
r/UKFreegans
r/Bordigism
r/CaptainHotknives
r/Ishkah
r/HousingCooperatives
r/LateStageCivilization
r/ShaunVids
r/AntiCivilization
r/Appropedia
r/BoycottMeat
r/BreadBook
r/CommunalistAnarchism
r/DialecticalNaturalism
r/HobbyPublishing
r/IndustrialAnarchism
r/KenLoach
r/LeftistVeganism
r/Mexie
r/NeoLuddism
r/StealThisBook
r/TheFinalStrawRadio
r/VeganGateKeepers
r/AnarhijaLibrary
r/MarxistAnarchism
r/Municipalism
r/PuristAnarchists
r/Reducetarian
r/TheBlackInternational
r/TolstoyanAnarchism
r/AndreGorz
r/AntiVeganOutreach
r/AskYourselfCommunity
r/BoycottAnimalProducts
r/CringyAntiVegan
r/CringyVegan
r/CringyVegans
r/DebateAVoter
r/DebateCivilization
r/DigitalFreecycle
r/DigitalFreegle
r/DigitalRequests
r/EcoExtremism
r/EcoExtremists
r/ExExVegans
r/Extinctionist
r/FileExchange
r/ForHarriet
r/HistoricalMaterialist
r/HumanExtinctionists
r/InformationExchange
r/InformationHighway
r/InsaneAntiVegans
r/InsaneVegan
r/InternationalCongress
r/IntFedAnarchistes
r/LoompanicsUnlimited
r/MarxistArchive
r/MaterialistDialectic
r/PlantBasedNews
r/PossibilistAnarchism
r/PragmaticAnarchism
r/PsychoanalyticAnarchy
r/RightWingAnarchism
r/TheLUL
r/Touchpaper
r/UltimoReducto
r/Veganarchist
r/VegansVsMeatEaters
r/VoteLesserEvil
r/AgainstCollapse
r/AnarchistPossibilism
r/AnarchyInternational
r/AnimalRightsDoneBadly
r/AntiTheisticAnarchism
r/AntiVeganExtremism
r/BigTentAnarchism
r/BigTentVeganism
r/BlackRoseAnarchistFed
r/Cantonalism
r/CarnivoreOutreach
r/CommunityDirectory
r/CringeyAntiVegans
r/CringeyVegan
r/CringyAntiAbortionist
r/CringyAntiFeminists
r/CringyAntiSemites
r/CringyAntiSJWs
r/CringyClimateDeniers
r/CringyNeoNazis
r/DavidKaczynski
r/exprim
r/FedAnarchicaItaliana
r/FedAnarquistaIberica
r/FederationAnarchiste
r/ImpossibilistAnarchy
r/LifeoftheMind
r/NeoLudditeHub
r/PhilosophicalVegan
r/PoliticalPossibilism
r/Possibilism
r/raddledotme
r/SubRosasLibrary
r/TextDebate
r/TravellerRights
r/TravellerSolidarity
r/Veganism101
r/VeganTube
r/Wildist
r/ZelfromAshdod
r/OpenDistro
r/TheLudditeClub
r/TheModernMortician
r/UnconventionalLives
r/anarchistlib
r/DoctorAvi
r/IntersectionalVegans
r/NihilismNow
r/VeganGainsCommunity
r/ARplusIO
r/EgoistCommunism
r/FolkPsychology
r/FriendCollectors
r/LeftMarketAnarchism
r/LostInModernity
r/MictheVegan
r/UnnaturalVegan
r/AmuseWiki
r/anarchistnihilism
r/DeepConnections
r/DeepExperiences
r/ExperienceCollectors
r/ImmyLucas
r/intentionalfriendship
r/VeganYouTube

Sources:

https://web.archive.org/web/20221105015650/https://www.thetedkarchive.com/library/theo-slade-disrupting-the-purist-anarchist-pipeline

https://anarchistnews.org/content/thoughts-discussion-between-left-anarchist-and-bio-primitivist

https://raddle.me/f/lobby/177748/the-ted-k-archive

https://web.archive.org/web/20230325163248/https://www.thetedkarchive.com/library/a-text-dump-on-jay

https://web.archive.org/web/20240209032709/https://www.thetedkarchive.com/library/theo-slade-responding-to-claims-i-ve-been-attempting-anarchist-and-or-anticiv-entryism

https://web.archive.org/web/20231115003438/https://raddle.me/f/anticiv/138355/a-friendly-reminder-not-to-get-lost-down-the-eco-purist

https://raddle.me/f/Anarchy/197192/-

A short timeline of tech/environmentalist politics related events in my life history

I’ve been going to Earth First! gatherings since I was 17, is ziq's claim that I’ve been desiring to argue people out of being anarchists since then? Or if not, when does ziq imagine the switch happened?

I think I’ve taken myself on some interesting reading journeys by delving deep into Ted Kaczynski's life & ideas, and someone I knew called Jay as case studies in a certain politics & philosophy. However, I plan to focus more on anthropology reading in the new year.

Age 15: Watched Bruce Parry’s Tribe & Ray Mears. Read books about building birchbark canoes and log cabins. Read ‘new age indigenous wisdom’ books, such as ‘Primal Awareness’, ‘Mutant Message Down Under’ & ‘The Vision’.

Age 16: Went to the island of Borneo in Maritime Southeast Asia with an outdoor expedition company who came to our school. Fantasised about running away to live with the Penan when I was in Borneo if the home situation carried on majorly sucking. Visited an Orangutan rehabilitation centre, which I’m happy can be there to also cure diseases and fix injuries that occur randomly.

Age 17: Went to my first Earth First! Gathering, made friends with one kid who was a primitivist & one kid whose biological dad had been an undercover cop spying on the movement when he was conceived. Saw footage of tree-sits in Tasmania. Listened to Seize the Day sing the song ‘No one’s slave, No one’s master’, which had the lyrics; “Mother Earth I was nearly the end of you. Please accept my desire to be friends with you. Now I know just how much I depend on you for life.”

Age 18: Did well in my year 11 exams, but didn’t show up to my end of high school exams because I was in turmoil with my abusive biological father. Followed the Earth First! Newswire, thought about going to Coal Action Scotland’s open cast coal mining forest camps which some people used as a base to sabotage coal company machinery.

Age 19: Went to live at a forest camp in England trying to block the expansion of an open cast coal mine. Got a call by a person working on resisting the eviction of Irish Travellers. Went to live on the Irish Traveller site, then squats in London afterwards. Met some cool & some strange people in both places.

One anarchist at the Irish Traveller site put on the film ‘Natural Born Killers’ for us to watch. Other anarchists put on documentaries about the Irish Travellers longstanding separate DNA heritage as evidence that their culture has deep roots, so they shouldn’t just be dismissed as ‘a mafia of thieves who only took up root after the Potato famine.’

One anarchist related to me ‘you know people get the wrong idea about these Travellers, the sites look a bit shabby from the outside, but inside, the static caravans are like a pristine shrine.’ I related back that I quite liked the Travellers not worrying about keeping up perfectly manicured lawns, and how I liked the history of some Irish Travellers carrying poles on their horse drawn carriage to simply live in large benders.

Age 20: Got told about communiques where a car dealership and rows of new cars were burnt by anti-civ anarchists in solidarity with the Irish Travellers I’d lived with. Plus, a primitivist communique about small bank sabotage actions, which I read recently was done in solidarity with eco-anarchist prisoners & Ted K. Went to visit a small rural forest commune who made their money making and selling apple juice.

Age 21: Went to live in Ireland to take direct action against a potentially dangerous gas pipeline the community didn’t want building near their village when it could have been built in a more rural location, plus where neither themselves or the country was getting much in return for this climate change causing tech.

Age 22: Went to live on the border of the UK & France helping refugees live in squats & tents. Learnt about a cool diversity of cultures and peoples, some of whom came from ecologically devastated landscapes, some of whom came from lineages of ancestors who were relatively recently hunter-gatherers.

Age 23: Got arrested at a road protest tree-sit. My free activist lawyer beat the charge by arguing it couldn’t be proven I wasn’t already locked on up the tree before the date I was charged with aggressively trespassing, and so whether I simply needed rescuing on the day in question. Went for brief stays to live at an anarchist community centre in Cardiff, Wales. Got to know a primitivist dude called ‘Jay’ more who had been at the coal action camps in Scotland & England, plus the road protest in Southern England.

Age 24: Went to live on a squatted community farm on the border of Wales & England. The land used to be held in a community trust of tenant farmers, but when the last farmer died, the solicitor sold it at auction without doing his due diligence to track down relatives of the community trust members. The land was bought by a dude who had helped activists occupy the farm potentially to be able to buy the land at a lower price, then turfed everyone off to put up a solar panel farm. The eviction team companies office was set fire to (not trying to claim illegalist clout by mentioning this, thankfully I have an honest alibi, I just enjoy that I’ve lived in places where interesting events happened).

Age 29: Started playing around with re-structuring books I found interesting. Like I turned a book of prison letters between two childhood friends, into a kind of unfinished autobiography of the person in prison, by reorganizing all the memories she would tell into the timeline of her life. This led me to next start working on digitizing Ted Kaczynski’s book ‘Truth versus Lies’ so that I could potentially reorganise the most interesting parts into a biography of his life.

Age 31: Started contributing to an archive of rare Ted K documents & suggested reading. Wrote a short research text dump on Jay who died in Spain when I was 26. Jay wrote a zine promoting groups who perpetrate misanthropic attacks and whose aim it was to kill or maim random people. So, I wonder what the radicalizing factors were in his journey and whether he was hoping to connect up with other Ted K fans by going to Spain.

Age 32 (now): Contributing to 5 online archives; The Ted K Archive, The Library of Unconventional Lives, Steal This Wiki, The Anarchist Library & Bibliothèque Anarchiste. Plus, working towards hopefully helping set up 2 more in the new year:

Finally, here’s a fairly embarrassing collage of news & activist press release clippings I was involved in:

toleratedindividuality.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/rap-sheet.pdf

PS: This isn’t a timeline of my whole life, it’s specifically a timeline focused on events in my life that have significance related to my environmental interests. So, although I highlight some of the events for their personal environmental significance to me, some of the connections were fairly abstract. The primary significance of some of the events was enjoying helping out other people.

[1] The bizarre case of vegan Neo-Nazis & deprogramming vegans who glorify violence

[2] On The Far-Left, Effective Activism & Violence

[3] Source: docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/100WNnA0jDcanb4zHdJc84p0g0y5NS_pawthGhidAAu4

[4] Examples can be found here: <thelul.org/library/theo-slade-my-recommendations-for-different-amusewiki-libraries>

& here: <https://thelul.org/library/some-of-the-anarchist-library-s-controversially-published-deleted-rejected-texts>

{1} I’ve only ever requested one sub-reddit, it had been banned for 4 years and ziq admits he only ever set it up so other people couldn’t set it up. I think people have a right to a space outside of raddle, not controlled by it’s mods, to talk about their experiences on there, same way people on raddle have a space to talk about reddit.

{2} I’ve been going to Earth First! gatherings since I was 17, is the claim that I’ve been desiring to argue people out of being anarchists since then? Or if not, when does ziq imagine the switch happened? Here’s a quote from me talking about going to a gathering:

“I’d like to increase my foraging skills, learn about updates on the situation in Northern Syria, friendly debate the application of ‘tekmil’ and discuss with people my work in progress biography on Ted Kaczynski to learn about more ways to help prevent people from falling into apathy, misanthropy, fatalism, etc.”

I obviously don’t admit to infiltrating anarchist events and platforms, these are events and projects I’ve desired to be apart of and promote since I was a kid.

{3} Nowhere have I claimed anarchists promote the Cambodian genocide, this is just a quote made up out of thin air. I’ve talked about getting into neo-luddite servers on alt accounts, finding people talking positively about the Khmer Rouge, and then linking them a book on how horrifying that genocide was. I never said they were anarchist.

{4} Created where nothing existed there before, so anyone can start a discussion on them within a few seconds. Added banner and icon, etc. Made them inviting discussion spaces for people to stumble on and join whereas they might never have found any discussion about the ideologies otherwise.

{5} This is a made up quote. At best it’s a misleading abbreviation that should be in apostrophes. Here’s the actual quote ziq is thinking of:

“And obviously I don’t think the revolution would end at worker control, but I do see anarchists as part of a big tent libertarian socialist movement, where securing workplace democracy would be a massive improvement in society.”

I identify as an anarchist, I see anarchists as part of a big-tent of socialist and left-wing philosophies. That doesn’t mean I think vague libsoc ideas are better than anarchist ideas or whatever. Ziq also considers anarchists socialists.

{6} Created where nothing existed there before, so anyone can start a discussion on them within a few seconds. Added a banner, icon, and sidebar to make them inviting discussion spaces for people to stumble on and join whereas they might never have found any discussion about the ideologies otherwise.

Anyone who wants to mod can reach out, I’ve given mod to random other mods before and it be a mistake, but I wouldn’t impose a stringent process on people wanting to be mod. On r/vegans I invited a ton of other mods from other vegan subreddits, someone made a post linking to charities in gaza, one mod removed it, I re-approved it, then they were able to change the mod hierarchy because I’d given everyone all the mod roles and my account showed as inactive, so they did and then removed the post again. Such is life.

{7} I’ve never set out to find exploits in anyone’s websites. I was curious to compare the web.archive list of pages to the live list of texts on the library to see the history of texts that used to be live on the website, but that have been deleted.

Viewing historically listed URLs that happen to be ‘unlisted’ today does not make it someone’s digital device that I was trying to hack or exploit, it’s just ‘the public internet’; it’s just what various people who own web servers decided to make public and never made private. They showed a public way of accessing it, then sometimes website table of contents changes or whatever, but just because one page that linked to it no longer exists doesn’t mean that what they were linking to isn’t still the public internet.

If there’s a story on someone’s blog that they link to on another page on their blog, and that other blog page gets deleted, such that there’s no internal blog link to it anymore, but it’s still public; have I hacked them by going into web-archive.org to remember what the link is? Or is it only hacking if I didn’t know about it until I was curious to browse the web.archive.org for their site one day? Or can you recognize this is all so far removed from what comes to mind for every person when they think about hacking that you’re essentially talking shit?

{8} Snitchjacketing at it’s finest. Why not actually lay out what quotes and evidence you imagine you’re drawing from with such a serious allegation?

{9} I quoting a publicly linked matrix chat and some unlisted links when I was looking at what texts had been deleted from the library for ideological reasons. It wasn’t a research project where I’d been gathering quotes for years, I just searched the matrix server I was in for reasons librarians gave for deleting texts.

I was careful about shit like not publicly revealing lists of texts that authors requested be taken down. The quotes that I released were all useful for anyone wanting to understand what type of texts are likely included at a higher or lower rate. So, what type of texts it is better to go elsewhere to look for. Plus, librarians could simply offer updated reasons for archiving various texts, then the old reasons would be superfluous, they could be deleted and the librarians would be doing a great service.

{10} I’m deleting alleged allegations which ziq knew before writing this, so not jubilant approval by any stretch. One side calls the other a dangerous stalker, the other side calls you groomers, I know the details and don’t wish to spend hours learning honestly, but I’ll moderate people making allegations without backing it up with a lot of evidence.

{11} What a load of twisted bullshit. The quote ziq is drawing from is:

“We, everyone who has contributed, have archived:

A ton of primary source documents on Ted’s life and ideas.

Documents analyzing the effect he had on the public’s understanding of radical environmentalists, anarchists, terrorists, criminals, the mentally ill & simple mental neurodivergence.

Lots of great suggested reading on anarchism & other issues.”

Ziq twists the quote to make it sound like I’m only interested in environmentalists to the extent they’re mentally ill, when mental neurodivergence was simply an area of reading way down the list of topics that is often covered in the news around Ted, so a theme that it’s interesting to archive texts around.

{12} From the about page: “Through helping clarify the distinction between Ted’s ideas and anarchism will it help encourage more people to positively re-evaluate anarchist philosophy?” I hope so, some self-identified anarchist would like to claim Ted as one of us, I want to fight against that. I’ve been the loudest proponent of not relating to Ted as one of us in order to encourage anarchists to distance themselves from him & his ideas.

{13} I didn’t quietly correct shit. I sent the cleaned up transcript to Zerzan to check I’d transcribed it all right, he read at least a long way down it as he corrected the name Adam Lanza. I just made a mistake trying to clean up a confusing sentence, full of ‘urm’s’. Which subrosa acknowledged at the time was a confusingly worded sentence:

”Zerzan: yeah… I wouldn’t... uh... argue against it, I mean if thats… uh… It’s conceivable, and uh… I think that, you know, hunter-gatherer life was more gathering than hunting, but still… uh... maybe that would be more ideal, uh [...]”

Subrosa: I think Zerzan was struggling to form a full sentence here, emphasizing that is “more ideal” and “it’s conceivable” (given that hunter-gatherer life was more gathering than hunting), while also suggesting that it’s a bit hard to imagine (if you’re “trying to learn anything from the record” / “in terms of our evolution”. Whatever that means.)

I was unsure what Zerzan meant, I talked it over with subrosa which helped make it clearer, so I changed it.

{14} This is just a misquote of a post-leftist strawman of left-anarchists, it’s an essay I was quoting as an example of post-left weirdness. Source: Against the Corpse Machine: Defining A Post-Leftist Anarchist Critique of Violence by Ashen Ruins.

{15} Again just a quote from a post-leftist hypothesising what an anticiv world might look like. It’s weird to me that some anti-civ’s relate to this as a deterministic inevitability, but that’s all, I don’t claim most anti-civs would be happy about this, it’s also a part of the essay where he’s talking about how non-anarchist societies would work on the periphery of anarchist communes. Source: Against the Corpse Machine: Defining A Post-Leftist Anarchist Critique of Violence by Ashen Ruins.

{16} That’s just a giant leap of insinuated imagination. It’s a long quote in a section on “The narrowing of approaches”, where I quote how multiple insurrectionairy anarchists reject organizational approaches at achieving their desires, that’s all, that’s not me relating them as not-anarchist or fascist, it’s me discussing a spectrum of philosophies, where the further down you go they become less happy with a wide array of approaches, and prefer less organizational approaches.

The line in the sand where I stop relating to philosophies as anarchist and where they relate to themselves as not being anarchist is clearly deliniated in the essay:

“Anti-Tech Revolution

Here we have arrived at Ted’s own proposed strategy.

This is a step back along the spectrum of the scale of technological society the ideological proponents are openly hoping to dismantle, but this is often simply for pragmatic reasons, in that, destroying electricity grids and preventing them from being rebuilt is a lot simpler goal to advocate others over to, rather than pretending they also have an easy solution for challenging feudal warlords who will rise up in the chaos.

As well, it is a step away from identifying with left-wing philosophy the way all the ideologies previously mentioned do on average to some degree. Despite all of them rejecting mass-movement organizing and allying, they often draw in followers through claims of being the only one true ideology with an effective plan for dismantling capitalism, the patriarchy, etc.”

{17} How does that make any sense. Entryism is pretending to support an ideology and trying to redefine it to be something different whilst hiding within it. Claiming branding real estate of ideologues I don’t like, making clear it’s a critique space and posting highly critical essays of said ideology is simply not entryism.