Anonymous có phải là anarchist không?

Anonymous is anarchist? by Biella Coleman The Web, anonymity, anarchism. There is a debate on and over the Web. The opinion of Biella Coleman.

Why A anarchist magazine should be interested in the hacking? In recent months there have been many attacks on banks, companies linked to the military and intelligence agencies, government sites, ecclesiastical, and much more. These attacks, brought under the collective name for several groups of Anonymous is not coordinated with each other all over the world (but mostly Anglo-Saxon), were sometimes devastating. If a bank's website (it happened to Visa and Paypal, as following the directions of the U.S. government have prevented the donations to the Wikileaks project) is hacked, officials jump, there are also serious financial losses, customers flee, stock markets tremble and if a government site is tampered with, jumping politicians, public opinion polls, police and intelligence services are mobilized. In short, the actual effects of hacking and cracking can be enormous. The repression is concrete, though in Italy the dozens of arrests of children more or less grown up (U.S., UK, Netherlands) indicated as responsible for the actions are passed over in silence. Recently, some participants in the actions of Anonymous took to the streets and protests have resulted in more traditional, often using the mask of Guy Fawkes (V for Vendetta) to emphasize their being anonymous, always against the usual targets: global capital, freedom of information and speech, the military, large corporations (of which the churches are a demonstration). Some commentators, as expected, did not hesitate to say: this is the chaos, they are anarchists! Independently, some groups of Anonymous, in the digital world as in the real, began to call themselves anarchists.  Ippolita According to many, the political movement known as Anonymous suggests one thing: anarchy. I got to see to make this association so many times that I thought it might be a good idea to explain in some detail the points where the connections between Anonymous and anarchism can mislead, debunk some myths, and ask some questions for further research. It is essential to note immediately that the term anarchism can mean very different things so let me give you three relatively narrow definition, which also do not cover all of its meanings and concrete manifestations.  First, I will consider what I call Contemporary Political Anarchism (CPA). To help define it, extensive use one of its most prominent journalists, thinkers and participants, the anthropologist David Graeber. The CPA has experienced some turmoil, particularly evident during the heyday of anti-globalization protests. The CPA is diverse and includes many strands and different philosophies, and shows regional differences. However, without raising too many arguments we can say that his latest incarnation is marked by a sensitivity to the left, an ethos of anti-capitalist and anti-neoliberal, a commitment to consensus, and new ways of imagining the direct democratic action. Graeber describes it this way: "No matter how we choose to reconstruct their origins, these new tactics are perfectly in accord with the general inspiration of the anarchist movement, which is not so much conquering state power but rather to expose, disrupt and delegitimize the mechanisms of government, at the same time gaining more and more autonomous spaces against it."  Secondly, I want to explore the link between Anonymous and what many people associate anarchy: anything goes and there is no rule. This is not the idea or political philosophy of anarchism, anarchy, but simply as the word is used without thinking in a kind of popular "common sense".  Finally, I would consider a smaller type, but very prominent anarchist tactic, perhaps the best known face of anarchism at the level of media images, seen as the media likes to describe it in detail during the protests: the black bloc. The media, understandably, like to care for them during the protests because they are dedicated to the destruction of private property, and they do it well covered with blacks clothes and masks.  Contemporary Political Anarchism The first question to consider is whether Anonymous is an instance, or is at least connected to the recent wave of contemporary political anarchism, in the sense outlined in great detail by David Graeber (1). The answer on which I point, in its most basic form, is "no", but of course it is always more complicated than that. Anarchism is varied, like all traditions, but the currents are different in some way dialogue between them and the recent wave of anarchist has become intertwined and fertilized with the anti-globalization protest movement, inspired by developments in the global South, such as' EZLN. Assuming a sociological and historical perspective, Anonymous does not come from either the CPA is fed substantially, even if, as I will explain in a moment, there are certainly some anarchists involved. Anonymous has different historical roots in the world of trolling and the board of 4chan images(2), that I have examined somewhere else (3); political ideologies of Anons tend to be very heterogeneous in nature. It is difficult to detect by Anonymous ideological point of view, but there is a point that seems indispensable, bubbling to the surface of all the different Anonymous nodes: a particular version of free speech, free speech, (as he explained a Anon, "freedom of speech is not negotiable") (4); often Anonymous seems to appear when censorship shows up, as is well demonstrated by the recent OpBart action (5). This commitment is not present in anarchy, but had a more important role in the traditions of liberal and libertarian (and more generally among hackers from different backgrounds). It should also be noted that the participants come from various political Anonymous and different traditions. When you participate in clubs or organizations explicitly anarchist, you tend to do that as anarchist. When you enter Anonymous does not tend to do so explicitly as an anarchist, social democrat or libertarian, but as Anonymous, with few exceptions (6). But if there are strong connections between historical and social CPA and Anonymous, it is possible to trace other connections? In fact, other types of connections seem to be a little 'more consistent. First, there are certainly some anarchists participating in Anonymous, that is, Anons has attracted activists who participated in IRL (7) to anarchists and anti-capitalists movements. And now there are Anons anarchists. But there are also a lot of libertarians, the Social Democrats, and others who do not identify with any of these traditional political currents. The second connection, perhaps the most substantial, is at the level of organizational culture. Graeber quote again: "[Anarchism] strives to create and develop horizontal networks rather than structures based on reports from top to bottom as states, parties or corporations; networks based on principles of decentralized responsibility, non-hierarchical consensus democracy. " For those who know Anonymous, the issue now seems obvious. Anons trying to implement ways of interacting non-hierarchical and decentralized, even if, as a collective, they have the tendency to theorize their mode of operation and management as part of the anarchist tradition or one of the anarchist tradition, or to link their actions leading to some anarchist thinker Bakunin or Kropotkin. I noticed that some of this bond formulated individually or in small groups, even though the reference seems to be often Deleuze and Guattari thinkers, the main theorists of the rhizome. 'S commitment to consensus method can also be seen in the wider circle of geeks (geeks) who have put into practice both in the past and the present day: from the IETF procedures (Internet Engineering Task Force, http://www.ietf.org, https://www.ietf.org/rfc.html). The question is: we label as 'anarchist' consent, a decision which embodies a very important non-hierarchical form of organization among hackers and geeks? In my opinion, it depends. Sure, it should be noted that the consent has been theorized and developed by anarchists, and is a form of social democratic type widely represented in many different societies and periods (Graeber raises the question very sharply in his Fragments of an anarchist anthropology). But I also think it is important to note that many embodiments of the agreement, including those by Anonymous, are not explicitly conceptualized by the actors involved as part of a broader anarchist tradition or specific.  It's anarchy! Many people who know nothing of a political tradition known as anarchism tend to use the term anarchy as used in common language, giving the word a combination of meanings: anything goes, chaos, lack of rules. Many anarchists are deeply troubled by this use of the word anarchy, because it makes you think that anarchism is simply something that has to do with the chaos and the absence of rules, which could not be further from the truth. Of course, anarchists flout strict rules. To put it mildly, are not enthusiastic supporters of the State, right or liberal, but I'm pretty obsessed with organizational forms, ethics of the debate and decision making, and in fact have been criticized for allowing what they call "process " subtract vitality and energy to their meetings, and organizational forms (actually, the process takes a long time). But we put in brackets for a moment the issues of naming and try to ask: anarchy, meaning "anything goes", captures the prevailing social dynamics of Anonymous? There are certainly elements of Anonymous that conform to this sense of anarchy, as has often characterized the unpredictability of the political wings of Anonymous. There are also times, especially during large-scale operations, where Anonymous seems to teeter on the brink of chaos. But this meaning of the word anarchy does not fit well. First, from my point of view of anthropology, in Anonymous there is a bit 'too much order with respect to what the word means anarchy in the usual sense, as I have investigated in detail in the article about lulz (8). There are rules, there are specific political and technological resources are tightly controlled. Perhaps the best word to use is random. Several of the best-known works of Anonymous have emerged in a rather accidental in the course of any action, without which everything had been planned in advance. Even the operation Avenge Assange has emerged in the first instance in this randomly, I would write about this in more detail.  The Black Blocs The last link is to explore the following: we may frame the Anonymous hacking operations under the umbrella of black bloc actions? I believe that this association may bring some fruitful insights, even if there are important differences. But first a word on the operations of hacking and then something more about the black bloc. Anonymous is, as has been repeatedly stated, not singular, but always plural. It consists of many individuals, networks and operations. Even if the hacking operations in the last three months have the lion's share, attracting media attention, there were many different interventions on multiple networks. There is no doubt that hacking operations have become important, partly because of the success of the operation Antisec (and its predecessor and ancestor lulzsec), which generated a significant stream of merry hackers. And in recent months, attacks have been less for the lulz and much more politically oriented. For those who know what the black bloc is, this is not the scope to enter into a detailed explanation on the history, tactics, ethics (in each case, the page provides an introduction in English Wikipedia decent basic for those who do not know anything, https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Black_bloc. I do not know if the internal goals and motivations of the participants are motivated by hacking Anonymous Black Bloc anarchist principles explicit, this is not the connection I'm trying to draw here. Instead, comparing the operations of the Black Bloc and operations as hacking Antisec will highlight some interesting aspects. What they have in common: Radical challenge Hard attacks to the police (STFU, Shut The Fuck Up)  The desire to make direct attacks  The tendency for smaller groups to be willing to engage in more risky tactics, risky as it is controversial within the areas between which moves both the BB and the Anons. But there are also significant differences. Curiously enough, the Black Bloc is much more open. It becomes black bloc wearing black clothes, covering his face and throwing stones, hacking requires more skills and hackers who run the operations are not properly explain how to participate in the solicitation (but it will prevent you from giving way to another action simply could not let you into their circle, taking into account the obvious legal risks). The nature of the attacks, hacking and operations, both the Black Bloc protests IRL have symbolic and practical aspects. In the case of the Black Block IRL many have pointed out that the destruction of property promoted by the Black Bloc is largely symbolic, although obviously the affected suffer losses due to damage to property (technically, it is their insurance companies to suffer the loss). But the biggest difference is that when you split a window, leaving no information. In the case of Antisec operations symbolic elements are in play, and organizations suffer losses because they spend resources to "clean up" after the hack, but hack even if the collateral damage appear to be higher and extended to ordinary citizens, as have shown some aspects dell'OPBart hacking (9). But not merely the collateral damage to be remarkable in this kind the hack: there are possible materials and long-term policies, which are caused by leaked information. We saw this with the hack HBGary, which prompted the resignation Aarron Barr and a motion in Congress for an investigation into the security companies involved in Cointelpro business-type (10). In this regard, even the recent Vanguard (11) is very interesting. As for the other connections drawn, the fit is imperfect. Yet there is something in the operations of hacking is clearly distinct from many other operations that have emerged from the wings by Anonymous policies over the past three years; present a radical challenge, a risk level that appear to justify further analysis on. This brief and inadequate investigation of connections between anarchy and Anonymous is intended to provoke a debate. Others have written about these bonds (12) and I hope to see more often these issues for discussion.  Biella Coleman Originally published on August 20, 2011 on Social Text Journal, “Is Anonynmous Anarchy?”, http://www.socialtextjournal.org/blog/2011/08/is-anonymous-anarchy.php. Gabriella “Biella” Coleman is interested in Anthropology of digital media, hacking, sociology of communication. She teaches at NYU. Pubblication and contact:http://gabriellacoleman.org. Note David Graeber, «The new anarchists», New Left Review, N 13, Gennaio-Febbraio 2002, http://www.newleftreview.org/A2368; David Graeber, Frammenti di antropologia anarchica, Elèuthera, Milano, 2006, ed. or. Fragments of an Anarchist Anthropology, http://abahlali.org/files/Graeber.pdf http://www.4chan.org Gabriella Coleman, «Anonymous: From the Lulz to Collective Action», The new everyday, 26 aprile 2011,http://mediacommons.futureofthebook.org/tne/pieces/anonymous-lulz-collective-action Calco della celeberrima frase impiegata da Bush Jr. per giustificare la guerra globale al terrorismo: «lo stile di vita degli americani non è negoziabile», n.d.t. Si veda il video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MlsLmDOhQ5Y Group anarchist (libertarian communist or even better platform, to be precise) in Anonymous http://libcom.org/news/anonymous-anarchist-action-hacktivist-group-founded-10032011 In Real Life, counterposed to IVL, In Virtual Life n.d.t. Lulz is a slang corruption of LOL (Laughing Out Loud, Laughing out loud), widespread expression especially in online chat. Acting for the lulz means mock, ridicule, teasing, even heavily, for the sheer fun of it. Most of the actions of Anonymous claim the spirit of the lulz, ndt http://www.democracynow.org/2011/8/16/disguised_member_of_hacktivist_group_anonymous That is related to the varied and vast system of intelligence and security, in particular in the U.S. has assumed even more elephantine than in the past following the 9 / 11. "In particular, COINTELPRO (Counter Intelligence Program) was a program of infiltration and internal FBI counterintelligence formally active between 1956 and 1971, http://en.wikipendia.org/wiki/COINTELPRO http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/19/vanguard-defense-industri_n_931405.html http://blurringborders.com/2011/08/21/the-paradox-of-anonymouss-anarchy/ http://www.opednews.com/articles/Anonymous-Anarchism-The-Y-by-John-Kelley-110811-124.html. Ippolita The research group in 2004 Hippolyta has coagulated around the writing of the essay "Open is not free - digital communication between ethical hackers and global market" (Eleuthera, 2005). Merge with different skills, from hacking to journalism, from philosophy to design. A multiple, complex and constantly evolving. Hippolyta is an old aunt, to whom we owe much, our vocation queer, but also the name of the server ippolita.net, a machine that hosts writing projects. Collaborative writing of essays participatory science communication, especially in the digital world, but also writing computer code, ie, programs, software, bridges can connect and relate the virtual worlds and real worlds. Development of tools and methodologies to write together. Writing to build networks organized in a self-managed, writing to present to others what we do and who we are. Writing as a way to radically change the world around them, to influence dramatically. To build spaces of interaction is not hierarchical, that is, communication that reflects our needs and realize our desires. The texts can be freely downloaded from Ippolita http://www.ippolita.netinfo[at]ippolita[dot]net.