Outreach: Food Not Bombs

Home Forums Coffee Shop Outreach: Food Not Bombs

Tagged: 

This topic contains 2 replies, has 2 voices, and was last updated by  Hogeye 3 weeks ago.

  • Author
    Posts
  • #734

    Hogeye
    Participant

    I can’t go to the Food Not Bombs event this Sunday, since I will be at a chess tournament. Jacob will be disappointed, no doubt! So I’ll try it next month. This will give me time to set up a display – one we can use at other events. I’m thinking a trifold cardboard thing that can be set on a table, perhaps with the three sections labeled What is anarchism, What is capitalism, and in the middle one with info on anarcho-capitalism, it history and place within the larger anarchist tradition, etc.

    It will be easy to have superior “capitalist” food – by simply adding some meat in the stew! The existing group only offers veggie stuff. Maybe I’ll make a crockpot of chicken curry.

    I notice that their facebook page hides the anarcho-socialist connection. They welcome anyone who wants to serve food to the homeless. They advertise: “Food Not Bombs has no formal leaders and strives to include everyone in its decision making process.” I guess I will take them at their word.

    I still don’t get some people’s aversion to exploiting other groups’ public events. It seems to have to do with the possibility of offending some hard-core sectarian commies. Who cares about them? They are *way* outside our target group of receptive people, i.e. “hopeless.” If they get offended and freak out, so much the better publicity-wise. Why would I care about the sensibilities of ignorant sectarian anarcho-communists who don’t like my message?

    • This topic was modified 3 weeks, 2 days ago by  Hogeye.
    • This topic was modified 3 weeks, 2 days ago by  Hogeye.
  • #737

    Jacob
    Keymaster

    I attended a meeting with others in Food Not Bombs NWA and asked them about us, and got some more information.

    Those who were there told me they have no ill-will towards me, so I’m still able to be a part of their group and help them with their servings and similar. That helped me feel better, as I was concerned about it and worried they might wish for me to leave.

    Anyone is, indeed, welcome to come have a meal at the Food Not Bombs servings. People who want to help serve are also welcome.

    What I want to address in responding to your post, Hogeye, is your suggestion of setting up a competing table with ancap literature. Food Not Bombs reserves a pavilion, (I learned at our meeting,) for their servings, so if they, (we,) needed to, we could ask you to leave, or even force you to leave. If you reserved another space for your own table you could set one up there, I think there is another pavilion somewhere.

    If you tried to come set up a table next to us, (in the same pavilion,) with your own food and information about anarcho-capitalism, I would personally see it as an attempt to disrupt the Food Not Bombs serving. The point of our servings is to give homeless and others a warm meal and introduce them to our group and to other activist groups in our area, to help them feel like they’re part of a local community that is willing to help them in hard times and good, the purpose is not to have debate. If you set up next to us I am sure that people who came by would see our groups as in conflict and see the situation as a debate between our groups. That’s not the purpose of Food Not Bombs, it’s not a debate group, (the way the Ozark Voluntaryist Network is.) We want to serve our community and produce a welcoming, safe atmosphere. If you came and set up your own table I would personally see it as destructive of the atmosphere we want to create.

    If the Ozark Voluntaryists want to serve food in public places to all comers, and use the opportunity to tell people about anarcho-capitalism, anarchism, or voluntaryism, I think that’s a wonderful thing for us to do and I want to be a part of that, (despite my divergences from anarcho-capitalism.) If it was just the Ozark Voluntaryists I would be fine with it. If it was the Ozark Voluntaryists and another group that welcomed public debate in that setting then I would also be fine with it. You are suggesting something different, going to an event intended as a community get-together, where the atmosphere is supposed to be calm and relaxed and where people who are stressed with life are supposed to be able to go and destress by having a hot meal and making friends and small talk, and transforming the event into a public display of the ideological conflict between various esoteric and popularly dismissed philosophies. If you do this I believe you would simply alienate passers-by from both of our groups, causing them to see both groups as “other” and probably to think poorly of those there.

    If people tried to take the time to figure out what was going on then I think they may end up seeing you as an invader, piggy-backing on the work of Food-Not-Bombs members in setting up the event to try and further your own agenda and cause trouble.

    There are other ways to have public debates and exposure of your ideas. The forum on Anarchism last January saw you, an anarcho-capitalist, sitting down in person with anarchists or anarchist sympathizers, like Abel, who lean more towards libertarian socialism, and having a civil discussion about ideas. I would love to see more events like that, but I want the events to be for that purpose, set up and advertised as a debate so that people know what sort of atmosphere they are walking into.

    I think courtesy is a useful social norm, as is mutual respect. You pride yourself on your willingness to tread on these norms with abandon; you interject into conversations both online and in public spaces with rhetoric you yourself have admitted in the past to be offensive, and you brush off anyone who reacts by becoming offended or uncomfortable, as normal people do, with the suggestion that they need a thicker skin or that they don’t care about freedom of speech.

    This scares me. You are actually engaging in behavior that isolates you from other people, despite the fact that your behavior is, in essence, disregarding unspoken boundaries that others abide by out of respect for each other because you can do so without violating the non-aggression principle and you regard the boundaries as stupid. This behavior has earned you a reputation as a person that vast swaths of people in the Ozarks wish to shun and ostracize. I am afraid that your reputation has and may continue to spread to the others in the Ozark Voluntaryist Network.

    You have the luxury of having that reputation without needing to worry about ostracism by others preventing you from achieving your values, both because you are more or less retired and financially secure and because you are far more optimistic than I about the potential for a free society coming to exist in the Ozarks in my lifetime. I lack this luxury. I am looking for work within walking or biking distance of my apartment, work I need in order to have the same financial security as yourself. Also, I am always extremely worried about the future, it seems to me that I must tread as carefully and respectfully as I possibly can and keep as many people willing to help me as possible to even attempt to grow free communities, much less ever succeed.

    You have been an immense help to me over the past couple of years especially, and I consider you a friend. I also value having the ability to have intellectual disagreements with someone for years and still be able to have them as a friend years later. I value your willingness to engage with me in debate and not ostracize me for disagreeing with you.

    Yet, I believe you are also doing things that harm my ability to achieve my values. You push people away from our group with your behavior and words. You would do this if you set up a competing table at Food Not Bombs events. I think you did this with the discussion you and I had on Facebook with Shawn Wilbur recently. I worry that you are doing damage that you are blind to.

  • #741

    Hogeye
    Participant

    You are right that there is a property rights issue; if they ask me to leave the pavilion they reserved I will comply – even if it violates their own claim that “people who want to help serve are also welcome.” Rather than renting another pavilion, I think I would simply set up near to them without a pavilion. Or alternatively I could not bring food at all, maybe eat some of theirs, and pass out literature by hand (until they kick me out.)

    Jacob> “If you tried to come set up a table next to us, (in the same pavilion,) with your own food and information about anarcho-capitalism, I would personally see it as an attempt to disrupt the Food Not Bombs serving.”

    This is a strange and irrational attitude. I am simply offering literature, and maybe food. That is not a disruption.

    Jacob> “The purpose is not to have debate.”

    Who said anything about a debate? Now if that anarcho-commie from Food not Bombs wants to debate, I’m sure I’ll be up for it, but that is not the purpose or expectation. This is an outreach event, not a debate. Are you saying that some FnB folks will turn it into a debate? That’s fine with me if they do. But if their purpose is “to give homeless and others a warm meal and introduce them to our group and to other activist groups in our area, to help them feel like they’re part of a local community,” as they say, then a debate is unlikely. The Anarcho-capitalist Circle and Voluntaryist Network is certainly an activist group that people, including homeless, should know about. I do like to call out people’s lies. If they say there are there to give food and activist info, and then they run me off, they are demonstrating their deception.

    Jacob> “If you came and set up your own table I would personally see it as destructive of the atmosphere we want to create.”

    Friendly, free food, info about our activist group – that is exactly what you claim they want. It is not “destructive of the atmosphere” at all. Unless some assholes at Food not Bombs make it so. I’m just feeding people and providing literature. What are you thinking? Are you saying that the FnB people might physically assault me, just because of my presence? And implying that would be my fault, for simply showing up and providing food and lit?

    Jacob> “If you do this I believe you would simply alienate passers-by from both of our groups, causing them to see both groups as “other” and probably to think poorly of those there.”

    I think if they disrupt my food-giving or topple my literature table, they will be seen as assholes and alienate passersby, but I will be seen as a victim of aggression. I certainly don’t intend to alienate passersby, except for the usual alienation from the ”unknown” radical philosophy of anarcho-capitalism.

    Jacob> “If people tried to take the time to figure out what was going on then I think they may end up seeing you as an invader, piggy-backing on the work of Food-Not-Bombs members in setting up the event to try and further your own agenda and cause trouble.”

    You mean the FnB people, not the customers. Those in FnB that really want to serve food and publicize activist groups will see me as part of that. The FnB people who are there mainly to promote anarcho-socialism may see me as an invader. Cool! Your point? We might even have “a civil discussion about ideas.”

    Jacob> “I think courtesy is a useful social norm, as is mutual respect. You pride yourself on your willingness to tread on these norms with abandon; you interject into conversations both online and in public spaces with rhetoric you yourself have admitted in the past to be offensive, and you brush off anyone who reacts by becoming offended or uncomfortable, as normal people do, with the suggestion that they need a thicker skin or that they don’t care about freedom of speech.”

    Yes, that is accurate. I put truth above being nice. And I think if someone is too hypersensitive or insecure to discuss things, maybe they shouldn’t. If someone gets offended by the truth, fuck ‘em.

    Jacob> “This scares me. You are actually engaging in behavior that isolates you from other people.”

    Why does it scare you that I like solitary activities and don’t care what most people think? I call that the virtue of independence.

    Jacob> “Your behavior is, in essence, disregarding unspoken boundaries that others abide by out of respect for each other because you can do so without violating the non-aggression principle and you regard the boundaries as stupid.”

    Yes! I couldn’t have said it better myself. I try to ignore stupid social boundaries. I am an anarchist. Per Haidt, I am strong on systemizing and weak at empathizing. I generally have no clue what the “unspoken boundaries” are, and don’t care to learn – since that, to me, would be catering to untruth and incompetence.

    Jacob> “You have the luxury of having that reputation without needing to worry about ostracism by others preventing you from achieving your values …”

    I’ve been this way all my life, even when employed. Integrity is not a luxury that only I can afford. I would suggest that my attitude is much superiour than catering to the lame ideas and values of the average dumbshit. I suggest that you should be less concerned with how others see you, and more concerned with pursuing your own self-interest, courageously and without caving in to popular sentiment and “what others think.”

    Jacob> “You push people away from our group with your behavior and words.”

    Really? Who? I think I have been very very mellow. I refrained from ridiculing Frank’s bunkum about near-death experience (which had nothing to do with anarchism.) If not Frank, then who?

    Jacob> “I think you did this with the discussion you and I had on Facebook with Shawn Wilbur recently.”

    Shawn, pushed away? If so, who cares, but in fact he did look up instances of use of “hierarchy” for me and pretty much verified that is an anarcho-commie term. He had zero chance of joining Ozark Voluntaryist, since he doesn’t live in the Ozarks and he is retardedly opposed to anarchism without adjectives and anarcho-capitalism. I got what I wanted out of him. Maybe you are concerned that he might not want to correspond with *you*, due to my interaction with him. That would be his problem, not mine.

    • This reply was modified 3 weeks ago by  Hogeye.
    • This reply was modified 3 weeks ago by  Hogeye.

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.