values

Posts: 14
{ similarselection }

❱❱ Anarchy: What It Is and Why Pop Culture Loves It

Contrary to popular representations Anarchy is a philosophy of radical care, not chaos. Kim Kelly wrote a primer for Teen Vouge…

Anarchism is a radical, revolutionary leftist political philosophy that advocates for the abolition of government, hierarchy, and all other unequal systems of power. It seeks to replace what its proponents view as inherently oppressive institutions — like a capitalist society or the prison industrial complex — with nonhierarchical, horizontal structures powered by voluntary associations between people. Anarchists organize around a key set of principles, including horizontalism, mutual aid, autonomy, solidarity, direct action, and direct democracy, a form of democracy in which the people make decisions themselves via consensus (as opposed to representative democracy, of which the United States government is an example).

Can friendship be revalued as a radical, transformative form of kinship?

We are not sure, but we want to try. Maybe the concept of friendship is already too colonized by liberalism and capitalism. Under neoliberalism, friendship is a banal affair of private preferences: we hang out, we share hobbies, we make small talk. We become friends with those who are already like us, and we keep each other comfortable rather than becoming different and more capable together. The algorithms of Facebook and other social networks guide us towards the refinement of our profiles, reducing friendship to the click of a button. This neoliberal friend is the alternative to hetero- and homonormative coupling: “just friends” implies much weaker and insignificant bond than a lover could ever be. Under neoliberal friendship, we don’t have each other’s backs, and our lives aren’t tangled up together. But these insipid tendencies do not mean that friendships are pointless, only that friendship is a terrain of struggle.

Joyful Militancy by carla bergman and Nick Montgomery

❱❱ Possessed in common

Post-Pandemic Transformation: Building a Mutualist Future

The narratives and the images of ourselves we’ve created over many decades are being shattered virtually overnight. It’s as if we had been looking at ourselves and the world around us through a crooked mirror, and now that the mirror has been shattered, a different reality is confronting us. This is a sobering and painful experience — adjusting to a new image and identity for our country. However, as painful as it is, the process is much needed and long overdue. Eventually all the fragilities and distortions hidden by crooked mirrors had to break through — extreme wealth inequality, racial injustice, brittle supply chains, an underfunded public health system, outdated public technology infrastructure, and so much more. Our social immune system — our collective ability to withstand shocks — has been severely compromised as a result of decades of abuse and neglect. It took a tiny virus to shatter the mirage of might and prosperity.

WTF is Mutual Aid?

Anarchists work toward two general goals. First they want to dismantle oppressive, hierarchical institutions. Second, they want to replace those institutions with organic, horizontal, and cooperative versions based on autonomy, solidarity, voluntary association, mutual aid and direct action. Through mutual aid, anarchism takes shape as a practice in care, exchanging resources and solidarity, information, support, even comfort, care, and understanding. People give what they can and get what they need. When a group comes together to push for a change; when social outsiders come together to share or explore ideas and new ways of living, these are all forms of mutual aid.

Mutual Aid: Building Solidarity During This Crisis (and the Next)

This book is about mutual aid: why it is so important, what it looks like, and how to do it. It provides a grassroots theory of mutual aid, describes how mutual aid is a crucial part of powerful movements for social justice, and offers concrete tools for organizing, such as how to work in groups, how to foster a collective decision-making process, how to prevent and address conflict, and how to deal with burnout.

Towards friendship

There’s been a great deal of upheaval in my life over the last handful of years. Mostly revolving around relationships I considered close…friends, lovers, inspirations, confidants, co-conspirators…Relationships with people that have played important roles in my life. The forms these relationship breakdowns took were common place. Lack of support and appreciation coming in. Feeling like an on-call resource going out. All couched in performative action, passive aggressiveness, and gaslighting. All happening through a multi-year cascade. One (or more) rolling over into another. Each complicating the prior and exposing true shapes.

I say “commonplace” easily now. That wasn’t always the case. The disconnect between my expectations of the responsibility people who care about each other have to each other and the reality of my continuing experience was immense. There was a point where I began to feel a bit crazy.

On the lighter days: How did my expectations get so wildly inaccurate? On the darker ones: If this requires so much work for little, if any, return - If the odds are high that difficult times are only exacerbated by my close relationships - Why bother at all?

I decided to get out of my own bubble and explore what other people had to say about friendship. What follows is a summary of some of the things I found. This overarching view is, to me, both informative (in a practical sense) and comforting (in a broader immaterial way).

None of what I’ve collected is a magically solves all problems. I’ve found I need to continually re-contextualized and re-considered it. I’m putting it here as both a statement of purpose and as a place to easily return to…

What is friendship?

Back in 2016 Maria Popova expressed concern about the increasing commodification of the word friend

“We have perpetrated a corrosion of meaning by overusing the word and overextending its connotation, compressing into an imperceptible difference the vast existential expanse between mere acquaintanceship and friendship in the proper Aristotelian sense.”

She goes on to create a taxonomy of friendship. A series of concentric circles of “human connection, intimacy, and emotional truthfulness, each larger circle a necessary but insufficient condition for the smaller circle it embraces.”

Maria Popova's taxonomy of friendship
  • Acquaintances: These are the people we are, quite simply, aquatinted with. Our connection with them begins and ends there.
  • Persons I Know and Like: “These are people of whom we have limited impressions, based on shared interests, experiences, or circumstances, on the basis of which we have inferred the rough outlines of a personhood we regard positively.” This is the group we most often conflate with friends. Both in the sense that we think of them as friends, also in the sense that we think of this when we self-define our responsibilities to friendship. This is a highly consumptive relationship. It thrives in the superficial world of social media. It is a photo, a sentence, or a Like.
  • Kindred Spirits: These are the people with whom we have a significant overlap in core values. We are sympathetic towards them and inspired by them. Though this relationship is informed by both parties performed public selves, rather than “from intimate knowledge of one another’s interior lives”.
  • Friends: The smallest circle. “[P]eople with whom we are willing to share, not without embarrassment but without fear of judgment, our gravest imperfections and the most anguishing instances of falling short of our own ideals and values. The concentrating and consecrating force that transmutes a kinship of spirit into a friendship is emotional and psychological intimacy. A friend is a person before whom we can strip our ideal self in order to reveal the real self, vulnerable and imperfect, and yet trust that it wouldn’t diminish the friend’s admiration and sincere affection for the whole self, comprising both the ideal and the real”.

How does friendship work?

In the February 14th, 2018 edition of Hanna Brooks Olsen’s newsletter, Hanna outlines some behaviors that make a friendship last:

  • Thoughtfulness: remembering birthdays, thinking ahead about what another person might like
  • Emotional openness and labor: actively admitting to what they're feeling, asking how the other person feels, comforting
  • Supportive behavior: listening, calling back to check in on someone, following up, making plans to help a person feel connected

These fit nicely with Maria’s definition of friendship. They are the core of actions that build and maintain the foundation (trust) that enables the level of connection and vulnerability required for genuine friendship.

What about love?

bell hooks takes a radical approach to love. She makes a deeply convincing argument that the notion of love as a nebulous undefinable thing is profoundly incorrect. In the book “The Will to Change” she defines love as:

Love is action and not solely feeling.

It is the willingness to nurture one’s own and another’s spiritual and emotional growth.

It is a combination of: care, commitment, knowledge, responsibility, respect, and trust.

She goes on to say that when any of those things are missing, there is no love. There may be the potential for love, but in that moment when something is missing love does not exist.

That resonates with me. I like it because it eliminates the myriad of commonplace excuses we might make in an effort to avoid the responsibilities of love.

If we change the first line to “Friendship is action and not solely a feeling”, the remaining definition nicely encompasses Maria and Hannah’s thoughts.

In practice

All of these ideas together creates a useful lens to look at advice and action around friendship.

For example: A reoccurring problem in my friendships has been people disappearing for extended periods of time (not the occasional ghosting - anywhere from six months to more than a year of no response). The advice I’ve routinely seen for handling these situations is: If those people return without any acknowledgement of their absence, you don’t owe them anything. Pretending it never happened is absolutely not an option. You can choose to have a conversation with them about it, but you do not owe them that.

That was hard to get my head around at first. It made me uneasy. After all a friendship is rare and important. Shouldn’t you make every effort to salvage it? Mix in a bit of the ridiculous but none-the-less real feelings of “What if this person that has disappeared thinks less of me for not re-engaging?” and simply wanting a friendship back, and it becomes advice that’s hard to put into practice.

Applying bell’s definition of love to these disappearances violates every required action: Care, commitment, knowledge, responsibility, respect, and trust. It is a disengagement from the “intimate interior lives” Maria speaks on. It moves the relationship from “Friend” to one of the lesser circles.

Friendships are rare and important. These situations are no longer friendships. Friendship is action and not solely a feeling.

Is an acquaintance owed intense emotional labor?

When we look at relationships in this informed and heartfelt way we create an opportunity to release ourselves from the exhausting back-and-forth of masquerading friendships. Freeing up energy to discover and focus on folks who value the work required to grow together.


(At least that's how I see things at this moment - Further reading is always appreciated)

People have found the solution of everything in ease and the easiest side of ease;

but it is clear that we must hold to the difficult; everything living holds to it, everything in Nature grows and defends itself according to its own character and is an individual in its own right, strives to be so at any cost and against all opposition. We know little, but that we must hold to the difficult is a certainty that will not leave us; it is good to be solitary, for solitude is difficult; the fact that a things is difficult must be one more reason for our doing it.

[…]

[I]f we think of this existence of the individual as a larger or smaller room, it becomes clear that most people get to know only one corner of their room, a window seat, a strip of floor which they pace up and down. In that way they have a certain security. And yet how much more human is that insecurity, so fraught with danger, which compels the prisoners in Poe's Tales to grope for the shapes of their ghastly prisons and not to remain unaware of the unspeakable horrors of the dwelling. But we are not prisoners. No snares and springs are laid for us, and there is nothing that should alarm or torment us. We are set in life as in the element with which we are most in keeping, and we have moreover, through thousands of years of adaptation, become so similar to this life that when we stay still we are, by a happy mimicry, hardly to be distinguished from our surroundings. We have no cause to be mistrustful of our world, for it is not against us. If it has terrors they are our terrors; if it has abysses those abysses belong to us, if dangers are there we must strive to love them. And if only regulate our life according the that principle which advises us always to hold to the difficult, what even now appears most alien to us will become most familiar and loyal. How could we forget those old myths which are to be found in the beginnings of every people; the myths of the dragons which are transformed, at the last moment, into princesses; perhaps all the dragons of our life are princesses, who are only waiting to see us once beautiful and brave. Perhaps everything terrifying is at bottom the helplessness that seeks our help.

—Rainer Maria Rilke, Letters to a Young Poet