Notices by Bike Shed (bikeshed@503junk.house), page 2

I also think Jewish Currents *actually* grapples with what a fair and just resolution to the colonization would entail.

Every Ghibli film is like: what if instead of working we went on incredible adventures and ate delicious food in a land of wonder. But then in real life Hayao Miyazaki is 82 and married to the grind

the demands of the Yuri union

Tech oligarchs will be like: oh the computer cannot be held accountable? I think it should make all the decisions now ;)

Important discussions happening on Instagram

Anyone who has done anarchist shit for a while has inevitably done and had bad security practices happen to them. These things are bad and gut wrenching, but not the end of the world. Repression is part of the stakes of anarchy and you minimize that to the best you can, but you will still be taught by the world and those lessons will be hard.

Many problems in security culture end up being a combination of many small oversights. Take the paradigmatic example of Pax in Portland. They were a known anarchist and broke a window at night. A dyed lock of hair was visible outside their mask. They texted someone on textsecure a few blocks away from the window breaking. This and other things led to them getting arrested and charged and taking a plea.

None of these on their own was a huge fuckup, but combined they were! Going to a protest or actively working on a project (and I dont know how that unsecured copy was stored while not actively being worked on) are smaller and medium fuckups. But the enemy doesnt need you to fuck up big, just often enough. They only have to get lucky once, you have to get lucky every time.

One of the things that frustrated me when watching the whole "shouldn't antifa respect nazis free speech rights" debate play out from 2016 - 2020 is that the entire thing made no sense if you considered any other moral aspect of it. Let's consider that most people, even the most non-violent liberals, would consider that you have a moral duty to stop genocide, by means including violence. And here is a group, nazis, whose goal is explicitly genocidal. They tell you that when they get state power they're gonna do a genocide. So the moral question is not 'should you oppose them?' but 'when should you oppose them?' And I think it is about the most boneheaded move in the world to say: we should only oppose them when they are powerful and have the state behind them. Like playing football and saying that you should let the other team get up 5 goals before you try to even score at all.

'hello, i believe we have a moral obligation to oppose the things nazis want, but i believe we should give them a fair chance to accomplish those things before we do anything"