#also they didn't make Susan Calvin a love interest as i had feared i think she's honestly pretty close to Asimov's character

[thedreadvampy]

I'm going insane my notes are full of people responding to the communes post going like "this is why we need a state to prevent abuse"

HOW'S THAT STATE-PREVENTING-ABUSE THING GOING? PRETTY GREAT I DON'T THINK.

seriously this is what gets my fucking back up about people in opposition to anti-statism or anti-carceralism they're always like 'oh can you propose a way to 100% prevent abuse or violence' and it's like. Insert I, Robot gif here. Can you?

like I'm not complaining about the lack of attention to safeguarding and justice in anarchist communities because anarchism is particularly bad at it! I'm complaining about it because tackling the issue requires acknowledging that it does exist in every community we try to build and that we have to speak up and deal with it proactively.

abuse happens in anarchist spaces, in socialist spaces, in marxist-leninist-maoist spaces, in capitalist spaces, in religious fundamentalist spaces, in feudalism, in whatever fucking system of authorities you wanna name. the question is how we deal with it and anarchism is deeply imperfect in that but so is every other system I've seen and anarchism is pointing at the better goal, I think - a method of community accountability which focuses on harm reduction, desystematising, and healing rather than on punishment, revenge or cycles of violence.

we're not there yet and we will probably never build a 100% foolproof system where abuse and interpersonal harm never occur. but frankly neither will any other system, human interactions are complicated and messy and sometimes there will be shitshows - our priorities are to reduce the number, severity, fallout and normalisation of those shitshows and figure out ways to prevent, react and support healing.

like here's one key fucking thing ok. I have found the way that anarchist groups I've been in have handled abuse allegations really traumatic and overwhelming and triggering. but that's largely been because I have some faith in the approach and it hurts a lot more to fuck up when you have hope.

but you are fooling your damn selves if you think going through the police or the state is less traumatic and overwhelming tbh. reporting and going through the court system is notoriously retraumatising and miserable for survivors, even when it's done with empathy and support. it also Does Not Work. punitive justice actively intensifies cycles of abuse and trauma.

obviously like. the main problem in these notes is that inexplicably people reblogging my post seem to believe the core thesis of anarchism is sunshine, rainbows and the milk of human kindness not like. hard graft to build tailored systems to meet community need. and you are wrong about that. anarchism has never been about 'building a community of morally pure sweethearts who wouldn't hurt a fly' it's about taking responsibility yourself, as an individual, for the wellbeing of your community, and working together collectively to identify what needs to change and what systems would create that change.

but the secondary problem is a lack of fucking imagination. people act as if an idea for change not being utterly bulletproof is a reason to throw the whole concept away, as if existing systems are less imperfect. babies, bathwater, my guys.

If I say 'this part of how we're organising is likely to present the risk of abuse' that doesn't mean 'we should stop our whole approach to organising' it means 'we should take stock of why that risk is there and figure out how to adapt to manage it.' Criticising your ideas and approaches is a vital part of building a better version of them and it's really frustrating to have any critical appraisal met with a barrage of SEE THIS IS WHY WE SHOULD FULLY ABANDON THIS IDEA FOREVER

like fuck man how are you planning to build a better system if you can't iterate ideas, criticise, finetune, adapt, reiterate, problematise and adjust, and talk about what the fail points might be? how are you planning to build a better world if you reject any attempt to suggest a replacement for the Totally Fucked Hellworld system unless it has already ironed out every flaw before being tried?

the reason I am talking about the cracks in a lot of anarchist ideas where abuse comes in is because I want anarchist ideas to work. I think they're good ideas. (not communes I don't think communes are good ideas I have been clear on this). I want a better, happier, less harm-filled, less abusive, more just world and I think the anarchist vision has the most elements to get us there so I want those elements to work, which means I want to identify what comes packaged in with those ideas that might be counterproductive. so we can do better. so that we can use the good ideas and dump out the elements that are likely to cause harm. you know. like how thinking works.