Direct Action and the Critique of Real Estate

Below is a link to an on-line article entitled:
"Anarchist Squatting and Land Use in the West
Direct Action and the Critique of Real Estate"

by Anders Corr

http://www.squat.net/archiv/anders/anarchist_squatting.html

comment form The Plazoid's new Public Relations expert

In response to an agreement to carry on on-line discussion with the editor(s) of the Arcata Eye under the condition of unanonymous communication, The Plazoid has brought on board a Public Relations expert. This comment was recieved by The Plazoid's new Public Relations expert, Anne Hohnermuss.

"Thank you. I would like to introduce myself. My name is Anne Hohnermuss, and I will be handling non-anonymous communications for The Plazoid publication project.

I am fully willing to carry on on-line discussion with the editor(s) of the Arcata Eye, if you are still up to it.

May I suggest a topic for the first discussion item? Perhaps we could talk about the recent 9th Circuit Court of Appeals decision in the case of Jones et al v Los Angeles (April 14, 2006). The decision can be found on the internet at: http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/8138B5E4723C6FE988257150005B327E/$file/0455324.pdf?openelement
.

I think that a good starting point would be to talk discuss the differences in coverage of this decsion by the two news sources, the Arcata Eye and The Plazoid.

Again, I am very excited about my new job and I look forward to many wonderful discussions.

Thank you."

The Plazoid Reaches Out

The Plazoid Reaches Out

The Plazoid recently recieved an email from the Arcata Eye (newspaper) agreeing to online discussion, but not "anonymously." In an effort to reach out to our fellow Arcatans, The Plazoid has brought on board a Public Relations expert to communicate with the Arcata Eye, non-anonymously.

Please welcome The Plazoid's first and only Public Relations expert: Anne Hohnermuss

What is "Anonymity"?...conversations with the editor of the Arcata Eye

Anonymity?

The Plazoid recently recieved an email from the Arcata Eye (newspaper) agreeing to online discussion, but not "anonymously." This condition imposed on the discussion by the editor(s) of the Arcata Eye brings to mind some questions:
What's in a name? ("...that which we call a rose by any other word would smell as sweet...")
What are the intentions behind this conditional agreement?

In response, let us look at what a "legal name" is. Many of our legal nems have been stripped of their traditional or cultural meaning and are nowadays essentially numbers. Our legal names are attached to social security numbers, phone numbers, addresses, P.O. box numbers, drivers' license numbers, IP addresses, case numbers, employee numbers, etc.

Our "names," which are essentially just numbers, exist to make it easer to keep track of us, like subjects of an experiment or inmates of a prison-system.

So why would the Arcata Eye insist on our identification numbers? Would that help them to relate to us or understand our points better?

No.

I can only think of two reasons why they might want our numbers: so they can concentrate their attention on "the messenger" while distracting attention away from "the message," or perhaps keeping track of the individuals who participate in The Plazoid project. Neither one of these intentions are welcome here.

The Arcata Eye editors are, of course, welcome to continue commenting on this blog, anonymously or not.