Editor's Note: The following is only a transcribed copy of handwritten texts that appeared in the fifth issue of the RAAN journal Emotional Poverty. Though these are the most well-known essays, they do not represent the full contents of that issue, nor can this means of representation be expected to accurately preserve the original layout and artwork that accompanied them.

February, 2007

"A Journal of Radical Subjectivity - The Total Negation of Everything That Had Existed Before"

EXPLANATION
(Why you can call this a "personal zine")

This buddy of mine one time was talking about how something that really distinguishes the period that we're living in is the lack of any widespread belief in the possibility of a different, more "just" society. Everybody knows we're fucked - ecologically, personally, culturally - but everyone's too cynical or depressed or nihilistic or alientated or whatever for there to be any hope left about rescuing ourselves, much less about creating non-oppressive ways to relate to each other or imposing such ways on those who currently dominate us. So instead, people live in the moment; going to college, buying on credit, or sheisting their way through life while trying not to think about how bad things are or the impending "collapse". I think that in some ways I agree with this viewpoint. It certainly seems to match what I see around me, and most of the liberatory and combative movements of resistance that I could really relate to were crushed a long time ago.

The world I live in seems mostly like one big, inescapable anxiety attack. But the violence I see rained down onto myself and those I care about in innumerable forms (school, prison, hunger, war, homelessness, misogyny, rape, homo- and transphobia, racism, wage slavery, take your pick) does not find in me a docile acceptance of its monopoly on force. For me personally, avoiding this societal anxiety attack - and ultimately, suicide - means trying to hit back in some way. It means taking some of it (and them!) down with me, or at least going down fighting.

This is the only value I place in life: the knowledge that we could (and that I will) choose to arrange our struggles in such a way that they might take on an ahistorical significance. I don't know how effective I can be as an individual, or even how effective we could be as a movement, but I know that at the very least we might be able to overcome some of the ridiculous limitations of the past and create our own spectacle to oppose that of oppression; one which could potentially fill a void that I and many other grew up with: that of the uninspiring state of conscious and identifiable radical struggle (that is to say, the struggle of radicals).

For almost five years now, ever since I was seventeen with not much more than a gut feeling and a cursory understanding of "revolutionary ideology" (which hasn't improved much over time), the vehicle I have chosen and, alongside many others, taken an active role in creating for these struggles has been the "Red & Anarchist Action Network", usually known as RAAN.

So, Emotional Poverty is the work of one person. It is a personal zine, but not a personal zine that just happens to be published by a "radical network"; it is instead a zine about the deeply personal experiences of someone involved in the autonomous process of creating and recreating a radical network. Where I use the word "we", it is only to indicate that this is also a collective process, and the contents of this zine are inspired as much by exchanges with other RAANistas as they are by my own experiences.

And lastly, this zine is not any sort of final word. If anything, it's an invitation to hear more from you.

♥ Nachie 2/9/07

RAANISMO IS AN ACT OF INTUITION

"The impotence of speech is due to the fact that art flourishes best on mystery, half shades and indeterminate outlines; the more speech is methodical and perfect, the more likely it is to eliminate everything that distinguishes a masterpiece; it reduces the masterpiece to the proportions of an academic product." - Georges Sorel, Reflections on Violence

RAAN is not an anarchist "organization". It's not a Marxist one, either. If we had to describe its structure, "autonomist" might actually be the closest thing we could find. But much more than that, RAAN affiliation is before anything else an intuitive act. In the network we find an association of refusal, of outraged instinctive violence against the ruling social order and the destructive forces acting against our ability to form nurturing, supportive communities for and with each other. And yet nearly everywhere we turn, we are asked to explain ourselves. What are your official publications? Where are you based out of? How do I start a RAAN collective? These people have missed the point. But no matter: RAAN is a movement that will explain itself in increasingly elaborate detail with the passage of time and as its actions unfold, all the more so because to those who unfold those actions, it never needed any explaining in the first place.

In our frustration with those who demand that our network qualify itself ideologically, organizationally, and so forth, we have been forced to return to our original conceptions of RAAN as an act of intuition. How else do we explain the preponderance of non-political youth amongst our ranks? How else would we make sense of the fact that some people can pick up the network's banner and plant it where their heart desires almost instantly, while others stand by and continue to accuse us of being "too vague"? In what other manner could we uncover the mystery of how in nearly five years of activity, despite uniting international radical tendencies and tactics that some of our more "well read" peers might have considered incompatible, we have outlasted countless other local and regional formations which had placed an extraordinary emphasis on their "theoretical unity"?

And most importantly, why else would we continue to be greeted either with outright animosity, militant skepticism, or mere passive support (and really, which is worse?) by most of the self-declared anarchist and "communist" movements?

Why has RAAN never needed a founding conference or "constitutional convention" to declare itself, and why was this never a problem for its participants? The answer lies in understanding that the network has only given substance to energies that had already existed, "declared" or otherwise, in our hearts.

True, there will always be attempts to elucidate our organic culture, the concept of a "no bullshit policy" (critique through action) perhaps having been the most successful thus far. But there is also a marked lack of language available to describe what drives us forward; the shared and unspoken understanding, winks and smiles, that allow us to function. RAAN came up and continues to spread primarily through fed-up young people who haven't yet run up against the dismal quagmire of "experienced" radical movements. A RAANista doesn't have to sit through three workshops and two documentaries about mountaintop removal mining to know that every coal company executive deserves to be executed in cold blood, because she already feels that need with every fiber of her being.

To a noticeable extent, we're a little tired of trying to justify ourselves. If we tell you that RAAN is a decentralized action network composed of autonomous activities both above and under-ground, aimed at smashing the forces that make us miserable, and you don't already "get" it, then there's not much more we can tell you. If you do not find yourself opposed in principle to such a project, or are perhaps even in support of it, then all we can say is that such a thing will never result from meetings, words, or declarations. If you want there to be an action network, then shut up and constitute it!

THE "ROLE" OF THE INDIVIDUAL

"Second, lessen emphasis on the 'two-five person' cell structure, and reconsider the power of the individual. One person on a bike with a backpack can potentially do as much damage as several, without the burden of consensus and the threat of snitches. The biggest limitation of direct action will always be the lack of solid people to work with. One person will not be able to do large scale liberations, but silent actions for which a lookout may not be necessary, such as break-ins for the confiscation of data, would happen more often if people considered the one (wo)man cell. Additionally, the 80's model of using actions to expose atrocities with video footage should be revisited. There's value in reclaiming the A.L.F's now-tattered Robin Hood image. I can think of two examples of chicken liberations in which footage was taken and played on the evening news, giving the public its first glimpse inside an egg farm. Merge education and liberation." - Animal liberation prisoner Peter Young, 2005 interview with No Compromise

After Emotional Poverty #4 came out, we have more than one request that, in the next issue, we talk a little bit about how an "average person" could get involved in the RAANista tendency. So here goes: as the communiqué on the preceding pages may have demonstrated (Editor's Note - This refers to a 2006 RAAN vandalism at a sexist hair salon in California, which can be read about on the RAAN Internet Hub), the potential for individuals and small groups to have an impact on RAAN is enormous. The attack on the "Tiitz Salon", which at its heart seems to have been a highly subjective action, may prove to be one of RAAN's most memorable, and we would like to encourage more like it.

As we've said before, the autonomist nature of the network allows it to suit the needs of each individual who consciously chooses to represent it. Rather than having a central organizing body map out the network's strategy, each person should make RAANista projects dealing with whatever they feel to have a personal relevance in their lives. This is the only strategy that matters, since it will create deeper and more sustainable bonds between each RAANista and the cultural/psychological entity of the network. Let us also remember that there is no "membership" in RAAN, but only action. Thus individuals could declare certain activities, attacks, or events in the name of the tendency without feeling pressured to do the same thing again next week, or push affiliation onto projects where it may not be helpful. Above all, we have to try to empower the individual and destroy the myth that one person on their own cannot achieve anything. RAAN's structure and identity exists to counteract the tendency to think of the revolutionary individual as helpless, because it provides a generalized experience and context for any action taken in its name. You could be geographically isolated as hell, the only RAANista - or even radical (that you know of!) - in your town, but as long as you are openly identifying your actions under the banner of RAAN, in such a way as for them to be unmistakable, they will instantly effect countless others around the world who consider themselves in affinity with the network, and at the same time all the accumulated credibility of RAAN's past activity will be conferred onto you. So it doesn't matter whether you're making a zine, showing a movie, occupying a building, planting a garden, hosting a potluck, or actively endeavoring to become the nation's #1 domestic terrorist threat, as long as it can be seen as another development in the elaboration of the network's gestalt.

As Peter Young mentioned above, there are also many advantages to working alone. A single isolated RAANista working in one of the Southern, Western, or Midwestern states (in the context of the USA) might generate more credibility than a well-organized chapter in one of the large coastal cities, simply because the self-referencing urban radical movement is so unused to these things and tends to place an inordinate psychological weight on "rural" (and therefore, more "authentic") rebellion.

History, and radical history in particular, is full of examples of individuals who took subjective, often drastic, actions that had an incredible effectiveness. In the case of RAAN, these actions become cumulatively more effective since, by identifying with the network, they not only draw from a collective credibility but also have their own momentum preserved and conferred upon the rest of the tendency as a whole, instead of seeing it dissipate rapidly into a vague memory.

And a word of advice to fledgling RAANistas: our assertion that action precedes organization is not just an ideological fetish, but a reflection of how the world actually works. You can have the best ideas in the milieu, but you're not going to find more comrades in your area until you visibly put them into action!

Some examples of RAAN actions that can be (or have been) reasonably pulled off by individuals:

1. Smashing up a symbol of oppression in a nearby town or assaulting pigs, politicians, or rich scumbags and, using spraypaint or a public computer with Internet, claiming the action for a network splinter such as Falce Proletaria.

2. Beginning a campaign of correspondence with people in prison, or stealing books to send to such people.

3. Spraypainting over parking meters to provide free parking (remembering to claim these actions as well)

4. Mailing pictures of RAAN banners, graffiti, or actions to any of the existing above-ground chapters.

5. Starting a discussion group about confronting patriarchy and supporting survivors of sexual assault, or a project against street harassment in your area.

6. Writing a zine about whatever makes sense to you, and publishing it under the banner of RAAN.

(None of the above are to be taken as incitements to violence or activity outside the law...)

WHAT'S IN A NAME?

"The different terms which Marx uses to describe the preparation for the decisive combat are not to be taken literally as statement of fact about a determined future; it is the description in its entirety which should engage our attention, and taken in this way it is perfectly clear: Marx wishes us to understand that the whole preparation of the proletariat depends solely on the organization of a stubborn, increasing, and passionate resistance to the present order of things." - Georges Sorel, Reflections on Violence

Have we any use left for the terms "Red" or "Anarchist"? It all depends. For one thing, there are many people active in the RAANista tendency who identify neither as anarchist, nor as a "red" (defined as an "anti-state" communist in RAAN's Principles & Direction). Our name, as well as that of our largest website (redanarchist.org) have also caused some confusion in the past, attracting an undue amount of union-obsessed "workerists" and alienating many potential green anarchist allies ("red anarchist" being a derogatory term used by the latter against the former). We should re-emphasize: we mean red AND anarchist, not "Red Anarchist". We hold onto these terms because we recognize that we feel a large degree of affinity for those historical tendencies, and we are aware of our roots in them. We see already self-identified communists and anarchists as among our most convenient allies, and we reach out to them. But we also do not let those terms limit us. Our name serves as a rallying cry and point of departure, even if (like references to the "Organizational Platform of the Libertarian Communists" in our principles) parts of it may seem outdated.

Yet revolutionary organizations tend to be judged not by their name, but their practical value. Just look at the Vice Lords, a radical street gang that grew to prominence in Detroit. Despite their ridiculous name, successful community programs and street presence assured them the support and new membership they needed to thrive.

In our case, because the network exists only in action, it is not only possible but ESSENTIAL for us to see ourselves as creating something entirely new through our efforts. Hence the idea of "RAAN" and "RAANismo" as an organic tendency that allows us as RAANistas to finally find, identify with, and be accountable only to ourselves...

WHITHER PARKOUR?

In the 62nd issue of the usually uselessly abstract, to say nothing of boring, periodical "Anarchy Magazine", we were paid an interestingly double-edged compliment when they said that, "[Parkour] may be RAAN's most enduring legacy to radicals". PK, or the art of applying military obstacle-coursing techniques to an urban environment, has since 2005 been used by RAAN as a proposal for a system by which to provide decentralized and accessible direct action and mental health training to as wide a number of radicals as possible. How well have we done? For the most part, considering that there have never been more than five active trainers, Parkour has remained a phenomenon without precedent in our movement, as we have given trainings in at least ten cities and two countries. Parkour has also served as an important vehicle through which to initiate discussions on other aspects of RAANista strategy and practice. But to what end? Outside of the network, PK has been picked up only by a limited number of activists, usually towards their own ego-centrism and without regard to the complexity of our overall proposals. It has become clear that in most places, the pre-existing organization is not in place to apply Parkour as a rigorous training tactic. Instead it takes its place next to capture the flag and "soccer on bicycles" as a weekend activity of carefree activists.

As we seem to have learned through trial and error, even the best of our ideas, or perhaps especially our best ideas, seem incompatible with the pre-existing movement. Without a self-imposed discipline and actual desire to engage in direct action within a broader praxical framework such as the one specifically offered by RAAN, Parkour seems to be a toy better left to the "extreme sports" fanatics who are busily trying to commercialize it around the world.

Why should we continue to engage in dialogue with the cynics who obviously have no intention of taking us seriously, or offering anything in the way of a practical contribution towards the insurrectionary culture we are trying to build? As we explained in EP #4, one cannot remove from the context of RAAN only whatever parts seem most attractive and expect them to work on their own without the backing of our continuing theoretical development and, more importantly, the willingness to test that development in the street.

IMAGERY AND SYMBOLISM IN THE NETWORK

Over the past six months or so I've had the pleasure of seeing firsthand how many discussions about the Red & Anarchist Action Network, in varied communities and forums have been turning toward questions of how the tendency represents itself in terms of its outward appearance. On the one hand we can take pleasure in knowing that this is indicative of a deepening consciousness on the part of our comrades, who are taking time out to look specifically at how we can create and manipulate people's psychological affinities and perceptions of RAAN and the potential for effective resistance in general through spectacular images and forcible, identifiable physical presence. The RAANista forum held in Portland, Oregon last December may represent a high-water mark in these discussions, especially since these issues pose at the very least some practical questions about how to best represent and replicate ourselves as a culture and movement both on the streets and in people's minds. Chapters all over the country are now tackling, with a principled yet flexible ideology, ideas such as the spreading of RAANista graffiti or the presence of network-specific banners at mass actions for the sole purpose of creating long-term propaganda and identity.

On the other side of the coin, we've noticed how the aesthetics of RAAN have become of increasing interest to some of our long-time critics. For the "anti-authoritarians" among them, we can only speculate that an encroaching realization of the network as a legitimate vehicle of resistance, perhaps with the potential to become the most practically-ideologically confrontational in North America, has forced them to resort to nitpicking about our name and "favorite colors". Much maligned has been one of the network's most memorable symbols, the so-called "Sickle-A". It is worth noting that only an armchair theoretician completely blind to RAAN's ongoing and unprecedented physical hostility to Leninist factions would be able to make much of an issue of our infrequent use of the hammer & sickle. More tellingly, those within the bubble of orthodox anarchism have clearly chosen to ignore the undiminishing global appeal of Marxist and communist ideas, and the hammer & sickle as an inflammatory symbol, to every new generation of conscious revolutionaries. That the energy of these youthful ranks is perpetually scattered, demoralized, and "burned out" across the constellations of authoritarian Leninist cults (which to the uninitiated often appear as the "default" conduits for communist militancy), is something RAAN will remedy with time.

Yet! This willing blindness is only indicative of a much more profound, incurable malaise: that they - yes! even the so-called and self-declared gatekeepers of autonomy - have no fucking clue how RAAN actually works! We have no "official" symbols, only recognizable ones. If the Sickle-A is seen as representing the network, it is only because some of those who have given RAAN substance by the weight of their actions have often chosen it to represent themselves!

To create new symbols for RAAN, new identities and languages, even to the extent of replacing the old ones, it is only necessary to make them visible!

But that might require getting up out of the armchair, first.

LOOKING AHEAD...

"There would never have been great acts of heroism in war, if each soldier, while acting like a hero, yet at the same time claimed to receive a reward proportionate to his deserts. When a column is sent to an assault, the men at the head know they are sent to their death, and that the glory of victory will be for those who passing over their dead bodies enter the enemy's position. However, they do not reflect on this injustice, but march forward." - Georges Sorel, Reflections on Violence

On a day-to-day basis, concentrated as we each must be on our physical survival and the interpersonal relationships that sustain us, it is often hard to fully comprehend the complex enormity of the project in which we are engaged. From where we stand, it is sometimes impossible to see the totality of RAAN, its potential, and the historic (or anti-"his-story") role it is slated to play in the radical movements of our and future generations. When we're struggling just to get what often seem like our insignificant (or insufficient) local efforts off the ground, it's easy to lose touch with the collective experience of building an autonomous network of resistance from scratch. But we can't let that happen. We have to build a consciousness of the Red & Anarchist Action Network as a "White Dwarf", which in astronomical terms is a star with an incredibly concentrated mass, so that one the size of Earth would contain as much matter as the Sun, and a piece the size of a sugar cube would weigh as much as a hippopotamus. Such is the potential for a vision like that of the RAANista tendency in today's climate of relative social peace. By actively seeking to develop a collectively-empowering identity, strategy, and symbolism; by refusing all dialogue and compromise with the guardians of this miserable world as well as emphasizing the interconnectedness of all struggles and the catastrophic intentions of our assault against capitalism, we run the risk of taking on a significance and "concentration of matter" that would open up possibilities, avenues, and challenges that we, from our current vantage points, could scarcely imagine. RAAN is for those who find purpose in life through the search for such things.

Are you gonna help us, or what?