Today Heretic TOC features a guest blog from Eric Tazelaar, a name that will be familiar to many here as a contributor of articles to NAMBLA’s website – which as many will also be aware by now has been under attack in the last couple of days from “hacktivists” along with numerous other sites engaging with attraction to minors. NAMBLA’s website now appears to be fully back in action and Eric has reacted very promptly with a piece on the theme of cyber-vigilantism. So well done, both NAMBLA and Eric! However, there is a danger that the site, or some of its functionality, may temporarily disappear again under further attack. Accordingly, Heretic TOC has accepted Eric’s invitation to run his article, which is also announced on the NAMBLA Homepage.
What prompted this spate of vigilantism was initially not NAMBLA, though, but the celebration of Alice Day on 25 April. As the Daily Dot preannounced on 24 April:
It’s Alice Day, a public “pedophile pride” day inspired by the relationship between the author Lewis Carroll and his young muse, Alice Liddell, for whom Alice in Wonderland was written. April 25 is supposedly the day in 1856 that Carroll met 4-year-old Alice, sparking a lifelong infatuation. In one pedophile’s own words, republished on a predator watchdog site, April 25 is a day to “rejoice in the gift of girllove and affirm the ideal so aptly typified by this special relationship.” In 2013, it’s also the day the hacker group Anonymous plans to bombard a long list of online targets with DDoS attacks, leaking suspects’ personal information and defacing their websites.
As it happens, yours truly personally had reason to be aware of the upcoming Alice Day this year, as Alicelovers magazine had scheduled the release of its second issue for that date and I had an article in press with it. The cyber-vigilantes, or rather cyber-vandals, have managed to screw up the release of the magazine, which should be available through a free PDF download via http://alicelovers.info/ The Homepage looks OK but the download is not working at the moment, as I write. Anyway, let me take this opportunity to let you know, if you don’t already, that this is a beautifully produced magazine with good articles – and of course I hope you will feel this accolade can be applied to my own modest contribution (actually titled “A Modest Proposal”) when you are eventually able to download the mag.
But enough. With no further ado, here is Eric’s article, under the author’s own title:
Hipster Vigilantism and the New Populist Attack On Free Speech in the Internet Age
“Anonymous” the self-styled cyber-vigilante group, widely recognized by its use of Guy Fawkes masks to conceal members’ identities, has launched another flurry of DDOS (Distributed Denial Of Service) attacks to overload and thereby silence the websites of organizations which it identifies as “promoting paedophilia”. Several of those organisations targeted were NAMBLA and Boychat which suffered temporary website outages.
We were, once again, reminded of the self-righteous – if inchoate – rage which periodically bubbles to the surface in an effort to deny the rights of others to speak freely.
In the past, this atavistic fury would have taken the form of book burnings or, even earlier, the burning of people.
Today, it is expressed through the sabotage of complex computer networks and requires a modest level of technical expertise that is itself worn as a badge of honor by those who imagine themselves serving a societal good in their concerted efforts to silence others. A very public – and heroic – identification with that which is good and virtuous, as in every moral crusade of the past, is very much a driving force behind these contemporary mob rallies.
As the targets of these actions, we know, from years of experience, that those “hipster vigilantes” responsible for these “actions” are, invariably, almost studiously ignorant of our message and our mission as well as the actual danger our ideas pose to their mythological preconceptions. Their representation of our views and our motives are as scurrilous and distorted as any claims made by tabloid journalists or government agencies. But, of course, they would be.
Considering that most of them are young and grew up in the age of hysteria – in other words, since the 1970’s – then we understand all too well why this is so.
As children and adolescents, they were spoon-fed a continuous diet of stranger danger, warnings of “bad touches”, alerts of missing children, and continuous surveillance by qualified adults while their permitted range-of-movement within which to explore life, love and humanity, shrank.
Theirs was a childhood informed by a continuous stream of missing children on milk cartons, indoctrination sessions led by alarmist teachers and earnest visiting policemen, hysterical t.v. news and the obsessive demands of parents that they remain within the ever-narrower boundaries which had come to define the limits of childhood and adolescence.
That all of these messages about strange men, in particular, were continuously delivered to them throughout their earliest years with an existential level of urgency makes it trivially easy to understand the levels of vehemence and intolerance our organizations – and our websites – now face.
Angry, destructive bands of crusaders, along with ever more oppressive laws are the result of a more than thirty-five year campaign to systematically suppress dissenting voices and contradicting evidence in order to fundamentally re-engineer society along strictly partisan – and paranoid – lines.
In this way morality, the perception of risk and reality itself have all been gradually, but dramatically, shifted over several generations while society feverishly wrung its hands, seemingly oblivious to the ongoing experiment in which it plays a starring role.
So, when we asked ourselves, many years ago, what the long-term effects would be of the sudden and astounding efflorescence of paranoia we were then witnessing, we now – finally – have our answer.
Back to TOC again. Some might be wondering whether Heretic TOC itself will come under cyber attack. Anything is possible, I suppose, but I imagine WordPress has defences to rival those of the Pentagon. Anyway, so far so good. Also, so far so good in terms of this current state of attacks remaining quite low key. Anonymous were probably hoping for a boost from huge coverage of their Alice Day campaign in the media, as happened following their spectacular (and much more pro-social) contribution to the Occupy Wall Street protest. It simply hasn’t happened. There have been a couple of articles, and that’s about it.
News just received from our Irony Correspondent : Anonymous UK founder accused of rape at Occupy London camp.
TOC writes: the following post, from chuck, in my view presents an important challenge to us all. Are we who oppose the dominant narrative going about it the right way? Chuck’s message is somewhat rambling and it makes references to names that will not be universally familiar, otherwise I would have considered using his piece as a guest blog. Even so, it is worth reading and giving some thought to it. He starts with strong approval of Eric Tazelaar’s guest blog:
Spot on, generally!!! And let’s not forget the sorry spectacle of what passes for “community” that that generation got duped into trusting, i.e. the therapeutic state (as Dr.Tom Szasz used to say). If everyone around you is loudly hating the jews (etc.), you quickly get the idea and either go silent or join in with “the party” (if you can). Anyway, most “citizen” slaves feel entirely powerless to do anything else, I think.
And then they got you and all of us fingered as patriarchs. Good ol’ politically correct hype, with some truth, of course. After all, their main push is AGAINST patriarchal authoritarianism and capitalism. Which, in its reform-minded strictures, all** of our organized actions uncritically (?), or at least, for reason of “seeking to build and organize” our momentum, perpetuate. Do they not? Nambla may have bilaws or some texts that say differently, but in systematic action, in many years of being a “national organization”, on TV, and all its publishing?
I admit fear to get more involved with them than I already have (but I can’t shake the reality that I am stuffed into “being a nambla member” for the rest of my life, by key actors against us); but the last time I contacted Peter Herman, he was quite authoritarian-stuck towards me. Should I be more detailed? Here? So I didn’t stay in touch. And felt the old antipathy creeping right back up. Together with my memories of all the text I wrote (and self-published in my old zine of less than 50 copies) giving examples. David Thorstad dismisses it categorically, in his usual intense dismissiveness. And that’s pretty much the vibe I got from the rest of those seriously involved.
It feels like shunning, actually.
Same with the boychat crew. And the Dutch activists that I met, back when. IPCE’s Franz got down, openly, on the “radicals” because he believes we don’t stand with them, in their projects (which they get to call the shots on), continually. No dialogue allowed. Either one gets the meta-game, or one doesn’t. I’ve always wanted to say to Franz that just because I have little to no presence online these days, and no involvement with any organization, doesn’t mean I’ve left defensive
measures. Far from it. It’s an everyday reality. And many times I am walking in major shit.
So, how about an article that admits these truths? Maybe I can help you create it. And maybe help you tease out the complexities and grey areas that many groups under attack (in serious ways) have to cover, in order just to survive? (then again, I think of projects like http://www.anarchymag.org, whom also took intense shit for their public challenges (a few years back), and THEY continue; but then again, they aren’t trying to get funding from status-quo-oriented people, are they?)
**I know from my own experiences back in the ’90s, that the form and content of most of the (euro-centric!) organized-side of “our communities” are chock full of authoritarian patriarchs and patriarchal thinking. Or so it seems to me. What does this translate to? How about accepting the status-quo in every form except when it comes to the love that we claim. Fit kids into the system, rather than advocate that they lead in their beautiful ways? Goes without saying. Etc. ad nauseum.
Maybe we should distance ourselves from such people who cannot or will not think outside of such boxes? Or, AT LEAST, openly challenge patriarchal-type thinking in an open, systematic way?
I do. (No, I’m not oriented to excluding anyone, who is for real)
And while I’ve been able to make connections every once in awhile, I feel no solidarity with any activist that I know of. Except maybe you. And a handful of folks whom have dared to speak up from time to time.
You’d think they/organized activists could AT LEAST send their problem people my way! But it really does seem that now that I’ve shirked my “role” as obedient artist and have tried to engage them intellectually, I’m ‘out’. Silenced. I’m NAUGHTY.
It’s like Bill now says: I have my “own niche”. …We’re “in touch” but it’s extremely superficial. No interest in even using my art, any more. Not to mention, no one allowing my art to be hosted, anywhere. That I know of. Even the link you link to which claims to want to include art [TOC: What link? Unfortunately, linking to art is a sure way to put a heretical website’s existence at severe risk] has never even gotten back to me (maybe the covert actors have intervened, I don’t know; maybe that would mean I should try to learn PGP?). Tho, if I begin doing art that “fits in” –to the middle class
sensibility of Peter Herman’s nambla, et al, then I’ll be welcomed back with “open” arms. If I lay aside my “cantankerous” truths, THEN, apparently, I’ll be accepted again? If I stop questioning things, then I’ll be “good to go” for “proper” grooming, again? (Recalling a boychat
leading cogmeister: “You could have been an activist, but…”) Apparently. And, yes, Peter Herman DID articulate this basic desire to draw more “middle class” norms.
No, I think that Anonymous hacktivists DO have SOME valuable critique. And that NONE (?) of our “culture” (as Bill is fond of promoting, at least in words) has been organized to adequately take them on, speaks loads of reality. If we had, we would have been systematically challenging them in varioius capacities, say at an anti-authoritarian conference; they do have them. Quite a few. So I’ve tended to go to broader topics. Finding sanity amongst a few, rarely. Learning to walk solo.
Sure, sometimes it seems hard to delineate who is stuck in patriarchal authoritarianism and who, for organizing’s sake, tries to balance between those real places which many men (and women) in this society cannot help but to reflect. But the bottom line appears to be that “we” are first and foremost NOT actively challenging the HEART of that which perpetuates colonialism and authoritarianism –and all of which Anonymous is all about challenging– both at home and abroad. On our boards, in our media, and in our blogs. (Where’s Roger Moody these days? And the people who loved ‘Minor Problems’? And what of the Indianner? All crushed by the european rendition of COINTELPRO? Or is there a LOT MORE subterfuge?)
Chide them all you want to, Tom, but I think my view stands clearly. (I look forward to you flaying this open and exposing the reality as you see it, in an ongoing way!)
Well, here we go again, Tom, congratulations – discussion right back on track; focused rightly not on people’s private lives and personal opinions but on widespread criminal misconduct.
If we are to go back to considering this ‘age of hysteria’ in which the current crop of young people were raised, there is no doubt the period coincided with the papacy of John Paul II from 1978 to 2005, and further under Benedict XVI until he was forced to resign in February this year.
It is telling that a key feature of John Paul II’s papacy was 300 ‘Wednesday audiences’ on his Theology of the Body, along with his then primary sponsor and colleague Joseph Ratzinger’s (who then followed him into the papacy as Bendict XVI and sought immediately to beatify him) clear instructions to their bishops to suppress any mention of sexual abuse within the church.
The wash is still surging back and forth today.
During that period to we saw a massive social experiment carried out in anti-technology, neo-medievalist ‘community development’ including such para-policing activities as Neighbourhood Watch, later explicitly named as planned and deliberate social engineering led by Catholic politicians.
Very large numbers of long-serving police throughout the Western world whose brief it had been to keep the peace were also pensioned off, to be replaced by new cohorts trained instead to enforce the law, while judges with a propensity to inquisitorial procedures began to pack the judiciary.
After that, check the legislative amendments for yourselves, with an army of neo-police backed by moral vigilantes and a packed judiciary to enforce them, entirely new laws were introduced and older legislation upholding common law principles of justice were amended.
Go figure . . .