how do people here feel about the use of this site's questions and answers in a book?

Question

if someone were to use some of the posts from here for a book, would that be cool?
who would have a problem with it and why?
what would be good about it?

Answer 1

I think that much of what has been explored on this website would be a welcome counter perspective to the similar publication of An Anarchist FAQ, which has never addressed perspectives beyond those of the author(s) in a really honest and balanced way. There have been some really thoughtful things posted here, and it would be pretty cool to see them put in to some sort of printed collection, which, in my opinion, is easier to digest for beginners, as it is presented in a more linear fashion.

One of the particular strengths of using this sort of site as a jumping off place is that many different perspectives might be represented. Though this leads me to wonder who determines which answers are deemed suitable for print, and what the process or criteria for that would be.

Other issues I could see coming up would be particular posters not wanting their answers included in book form, or not wanting to have them be attributed to them in print, though it doesn't make much sense to be concerned about that if you've created a profile for this site, which is far easier to come across at random than a book. I suppose a few of the regular posters have expressed thoughts that might lead them to wanting to defend their intellectual property, but fuck that.

Comments

Who on here defended intellectual property? That's genuinely hilarious, I thought we had been quite lucky to have a total lack of Noam Chomsky type anarcho-celebrities who copyright books, but maybe I missed someone. As far as I know even "an-"caps don't support IP?

---

There may not be anyone who would actually defend intellectual property, but it seemed like one possible objection, I don't presume to understand some of the, er, nuances(?) of opinions and ideas expressed here.

Answer 2

Ingrate is right that it might be useful to have a book that addresses perspectives that AFAQ does not, and I think that there have been some pretty good/interesting questions and answers on this site.

My favorite aspect of this site is that there are usually several answers to each question and this, I think, is part of what makes it superior to AFAQ.  I suppose that could be replicated in a book but on the face of it it seems like something the internet is pretty well suited for: I think I read the answers really differently than I would if they were in a book simply because of my awareness that I or anyone else can contest everything that's being said, and whatever we say will have just as much weight as the original claims.  Even if you read a book really critically and take notes and write response papers and stuff, it's not the same thing.

Another thing is that I at least, and I think most people who use this site, do not write all that carefully on here. I wouldn't really feel comfortable seeing anything I've written here in a book because I don't feel the prose is very good. One way around this might be to steal ideas but not use anyone's exact phrasings?

Also, as much as I dislike AFAQ, its answers tend to have quite a lot of detailed information whereas on this site I think people mostly just say what they think and at most cite philosophers and theorists. It's unusual to see a great deal of detailed historical information here, for example.

Another issue I just thought of is that this website is a funny mix in that it tries to answer basic questions for people who aren't familiar with anarchist thought, but most of the people who use the site regularly do so to ask for information or other perspectives on issues that only people who have been interested in anarchist politics for a long time would even be aware of.

Answer 3

I think a book of info here using the format of "Anarchy Works" (based on Q&A under section headers such as "Decisions" or "Economy") could do well with a good editor who attempted to include diverse perspectives, but it would make a really unorthodox and perhaps incoherent book. It would have an advantage in diversity and a disadvantage in the consistency. I'm fine with that though.

Most of my posts are meant as starting places for a larger collection of more completed writings but feel free to use whatever you want.