Talk:Evasion (book)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Philosophy Portal This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Philosophy, which collaborates on articles related to philosophy. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received an importance rating on the importance scale.
Additional information: Related task forces (major fields): Philosophical literature Related task forces (major traditions): Anarchism

Contents 1 Anarchist? 2 It should be mentioned that... 3 non-neutral 4 Fair use rationale for Image:Evasion cover.jpg

[edit] Anarchist?

this book should not be titled under anarchist books,principles, or ideas. its just another zine made into a book by the well known publishing company crimethinc. it does not openly advocate any kind of revolution or ideologies. just one of the many numerous amounts of teenage kids, at that time, who felt it correct to write a zine about their traveling experiance.

^ROFLMAO, you obviously have no understanding of Anarchist principles etc. No offense.

"Poverty, unemployment, homelessness - if you're not having fun, you're not doing it right!" There is no greater revolutionary anarchist principle than that. The silly Lumpenproletariat just need to change their point of view and the world will be a better place. @NrKiii!!!11

There is also speculation (which I find pretty valid) that this kid is Peter Young, who was arrested and convicted for several ALF raids on mink farms, so if you think it's just some teenager with no revolutionary principles, think again. The Ungovernable Force 04:21, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

--- I agree with the first poster. I see no reason why this should be titled under anarchism. The author is selfish and mercenary in his allegiances. He would, it seems, advocate any ideology, or refrain therefrom, as long as it suited his ends. Parasitism, whether by the state, or bosses, or in this case a self-styled hobo, is still parasitism. If you think the abject selfishness, refusal to work, and parasitism are anarchist principles, then you are the one lacking understanding.

Refusal to work under what context? Crimethinc (at least at times) advocates work refusal as a way to gain the time to pursue more revolutionary acts (see the "Unemployment" section in Recipes for Disaster: An Anarchist Cookbook) and to decrease you're de facto support for capitalism. How is that unanarchistic? I agree that if you drop-out purely for selfish desires and don't do anything to better the world, then you aren't much of an anarchist, but that's not what it's supposed to be about. Now, we can debate the actions and motivations of the protagonist in this particular book, because I think they are pretty complex--there are clearly selfish and selfless elements in his refusal to work, and I'm not trying to praise him too much (I personally preferred the women in Off the Map to the guy in Evasion, who seemed like a bit of a jerk to me). Regardless, the book is published by an anarchist group, is stocked in anarchist bookstores and is common reading in modern anarchist circles (at least in Amerikkka), so the link to anarchism is undeniable IMO. Case in point: two weeks ago at Food Not Bombs we had an informal discussion of the book and Peter Young, the alleged author, and everyone seemed to have read it. At the same time, I haven't heard of too many non-anarchists reading it or anything else by crimethinc, so I think it's safe to make a connection. The Ungovernable Force 07:23, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

--- My point is that there is nothing in this book that makes it anarchist. If I got a thousand anarchists to read Mein Kampf, would that make it an anarchist? A million? What if AnarchInc published it? Then? But if what's popular with anarchists makes something anarchist, then yea, I guess I'll have to accept that anarchy has become little more than selfish hedonism wrapped in something resembling, but not quite, political theory.

If Mein Kampf was read exclusively by anarchists, and if many of them really liked it, then yes, I'd say it was an anarchist book. It would probably mean that the ideals of anarchism had changed drastically, but still. That's part of what is important about this--that anarchists are the only ones who read Evasion as far as I know. I haven't met any non-anarchists who have even heard of it. The Ungovernable Force 06:56, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

There you have it kids. @NrKiii!!!11 It is whatever you want it to be!

Ok. Next time I want to become the facist dictator of the American empire, I'll just say I'm an anarchist and I'll be right because according to you anarchism is whatever you want it to be! Tool.

[edit] It should be mentioned that...

There is an interview with the author online here. There was also an interview with him in the October 2001 issue of Book magazine. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Brian951378246 (talk • contribs) 19:29, 2 February 2007 (UTC).

Forgot to sign my above post =] Brian951378246 19:30, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

The fact that anyone would put peters name in here is embarassing to say the least. Don't do the polices work for them. It's not peter, but even if it was you don't talk about this kind of thing on the internet.

[edit] non-neutral

Phrases like "amazing and inspiring" need to be removed and a source found for this section. - Zepheus <ゼィフィアス> 16:50, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

This is actually the description of Evasion put out by CrimethInc; I believe it was in either the introduction of the afterword of the book itself. I'll note this in the article. 4.143.215.161 07:44, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Than it's copyrighted material and shouldn't be put on wikipedia because it's non-neutral; that's like posting an author's review of his own book.

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Evasion cover.jpg

Image:Evasion cover.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 10:49, 27 October 2007 (UTC)