Culture Wars/Current Controversies

Exercises In Degeneration: The C4SS Experience

By Alexander McNabb


Occasionally I wander over to Center For a Stateless Society, which operates under the tag line “Left Anarchist Think Tank and Media Center.” Aside from the mostly harmless pontifications of the relatively boring and uninspiring writer Kevin Carson, C4SS has proven to be more notable for attracting the most inane critical theory drivel imaginable from various misfits and miscellaneous social pariahs.

Some of the choicer morsels include the following:

From Nathan Goodman‘s The Knowledge Problem of Privilege:

Women experience misogyny in their day to day lives. Many individual women know things about sexual harassment, casual sexism, and a wide range of other gender issues that I will never know, because I am not a woman, and I do not experience them. Recognizing that this distributed knowledge exists has consequences. It means that I should not dismiss women’s experiences of sexism or presume I know more about sexism than they. It means that within the realm of feminist activism, I should not always have as important a decision making role as the women who actually experience the oppression caused by patriarchy. In other words, acknowledging distributed knowledge leads me to “check my privilege.”

Astute readers will recognize this is actually the Genetic Fallacy masquerading as enlightenment. As other writers have noted, this sort of postmodern standpoint theory is nothing more than a cheap political weapon to fight identity politics battles with. Much like Marxian class consciousness, the claim here is that a person simply doesn’t “get it” because they are male. Like most of this simpering drivel it relies on appealing to the mystical ineffable experience of “being a woman,” something that the author no doubt secretly covets.

In Where Right Libertarianism Goes Wrong, Andrew Kerr scores points with the secular humanist God by saying this:

Whilst libertarians do earnestly oppose racism, homophobia, misogyny & transphobia, at times opposition is little more than lip-service. The libertarian belief in human agency blinds many to the reality that many people experience, due to the structure of society. We need not be afraid of acknowledging the effect of structure as well as agency. It is vital that supporters of a philosophy of liberty are enthusiastic in their opposition to all barriers to human freedom.

Yes, it is not enough to merely smash the state, one must also carry on the good fight to see that the Buffalo Bills of the world are treated with the same respect as everyone else. Your instinctive revulsion at a transgendered gay pride marcher swishing hir nipple tassels at you constitutes a form of direct oppression and you must learn to feel a genuine sense of appreciation for this cultural enrichment that you are experiencing.

This obviously disturbed author takes it a few steps further and finds the institution of Father’s Day itself to constitute a barbaric veneration of vile, oppressive patriarchy. In No Fathers, No Masters, “Alice Raizel” opines the following:

The Father as an archetypical figure is an image of everything which we children of the Enlightenment should revolt against to the depths of our souls. The Latin pater is the root of patriarchy, patriotism, paternalism; the veneration of the Father is the veneration of the state, of male supremacy, of age hierarchy, of militarism, of social control. The Father is the heart and soul of the ancien regime, as the first counter-Enlightenment writers such as Robert Filmer and Joseph de Maistre recognised explicitly. The Father is the Lawgiver, the enforcer of authority, the officer of society tasked with racking down the individualities and potentialities of childhood and producing another drone for the social labour force of production and reproduction. In the Abrahamic religions, God if the Father, and every right-wing religious organisation is today busily propping up father with the authority of God.

This brand of over the top vitriol does more to raise questions about the author’s childhood than anything else. Such a misanthropic hatred for the very concept of fatherhood itself from a self-evidently spiteful, black souled transsexual abomination suggests the writer was in fact raised by John Wayne Gacy and spent summers being molested by Uncle Ed Gein. Everything pernicious and revolting in this world is associated with those awful male oppressors who have the unmitigated GALL to raise their children. Those conniving bastards dare to corrupt the innocent youth with concepts of responsibility, manliness, and decency? And then celebrate it with a special holiday?! The writer makes no bones about desiring a world where parenting is accorded absolutely no respect or honor whatsoever. To call for the destruction of fatherhood itself as a meaningful concept is a bit bold even for a radical feminist and actually provoked a negative response from the readers themselves, showing that there was some semblance of sanity left in this cesspool of extreme postmodern edginess.

All hopes were soon dashed by Cathy Reisenwitz‘s piece on how the very existence of gender norms themselves is oppression however:

Gender roles as they are currently constructed provide a feeling of security for women. They provide a feeling of doing good for men. I see this as similar to how state control provides security to citizens and the feeling of doing good to bureaucrats. But, ultimately, those feelings come at the very dear price of freedom. The coercion in gender roles is less overt than that of the state. But both effectively limit trade, and for the same reasons.

In Libertarianspeak, “coercion” is “bad” and may be responded to with violence. Apparently to feel security given by a socially constructed role limits one’s freedom, and freedom must be protected at all costs even if it involves engaging in a dogmatic campaign of zealous extermination of anything resembling “traditional values.” Hell I’m not even sure how one would fight such a war, and apparently neither is the man-jawed author who laments “But a bigger, better, stronger part longs for the freedom to make my own way.” Sounds like something the MALE HALF of Reisenwitz would say, perhaps she should contact the previous author for a connection on estrogen replacement therapy.

The C4SS Editorial Team

Overall, C4SS demonstrates what happens when progressive leftism infects any group or organization. The current crop of authors has successfully hijacked the anti-state “think tank” and turned into a soapbox for pet social justice issues. The most fascinating aspect of the degeneration of C4SS is observing how authors now brazenly agitate for their gender nihilism as being of equal importance with the battle against The State itself. One is immediately reminded of Atheism+, another cesspool of masturbatory narcissistic feminist rhetoric loosely associated with a parent ideology. Clearly the C4SS is currently “Social Justice Feminist Gender Warriors + A Dash of Anarchy.” It will be quite interesting to see how many privileged white gender issue hobbyists can be added to a political group before it crashes under the weight of so much cultural Marxist rhetoric.


1 reply »

  1. One thing I would revolt against is the too-common equation of individualism and nihilism with SJW-and-liberal attitudes. Ragnar Redbeard was an individualist and a moral nihilist, will anyone accuse him of being a Pinko modernist? From what I can tell, it’s people who’re most into Nietzsche and Stirner, the Ur-Individualists, who have unyielding contempt for this mystical religion pretending at science.

Leave a Reply