Field Report: NYC - A Guide to the Political Fauna
Anarch Free Press, October 25, 2008
The New York scene barely has a pulse, so to speak. Even with the notoriously liberal, young and high-burnout IT, there's been little done to make inroads onto the political stage by the friendly opposition, even given such fertile ground. This can likely be attributed to the reputation NYC has for being taxing on all parties concerned, regardless of affiliation. A recent speech given on October 24th by IT party leader E. Wright, served to emphasize this point, and listed a good number of the luminaries of the region who have suffered unexpected downfalls as a result of the rapidity with which things seem to happen in the city.
This, however, should not be a definitive point in dissuading young hopefuls from immigrating to the region. As this author has stated in the past, the city of New York is very close to embracing the movement's ideals openly, even as it is IT held, and there is little to prevent non-violent activists from setting down roots. The one eternal problem for a discerning neonate, however, is that the lack of community amongst our faction makes it necessary to navigate the straights of the IT Elysium, and requires them to "play by the big kids rules" as it were, when first entering the city. It can be difficult, as such, to adjust to the seeming lack of personal freedoms one must endure in order to forge any solid organization here.
The author of this article, however, is a notably outspoken member of the movement, and in garnering the active hostility of many IT officials, has taken a lot of the guess-work out of IT etiquette for those interested in coming to the city. As an explorer of sorts, I and my associate have tested the waters, and can hence outline an "safe passage" to those who are willing and able to fly low on the radar. Below, is a list of current officials, and a brief sketch of how each one of them behaves, and how to deal with them. Keep in mind that these observations are based on a month's stay only, and that NYC's high rate of turnover may make them invalid soon. If you have more specific questions, or are interested in visiting NYC, please contact the author of this document at email@example.com.
E. Wright: (B) The leader of the IT movement in NYC, Wright is notable for being originally one of the descendants of Smiling Jack, and for seemingly being very young for a person in his position. He is adamant about the validity of the IT, and not a sympathizer by any stretch of the imagination, but he is noteworthy for his very human approach to politics and his belief in civil liberties. He makes a good show of being agitated by commentary, but as of this date will not exercise the M.6 for offenses of to etiquette and for outspoken and even uncivil protest. It is our recommendation, however, that if you seek to come to the city, you do your best to be polite to him initially, as our faction already is putting more than enough strain on his patience.
G. Parker: (Tor) We've not had much contact with social secretary Parker, but he's not at all subtle about his distaste for our faction, nor the thinly veiled threats made ever so politely to people he deems his lessers. He exudes a bourgeoisie arrogance that is probably best played to through submission, and seems the sort likely to wish grave illness to those who displease him.
L. Dusable: (N) The groundskeeper, DuSable, is at the very least, a bluntly honest fellow. He has gone so far to say "I hate you. I hate you and everything you stand for, and I wish to shoot you" in a public forum, which probably is in close alignment with his actual sentiments. He is very obviously able to listen covertly to conversations, and will likely seize upon "treasonous" ideas if you see fit to voice them. Other than that, he seems refreshingly straightforward and non-duplicitous in his views.
R. Haldor: (Tre) Haldor, the waste-management official, is a quiet sort, who does not seem to have any motives to take action against agitators aside from those commands he receives from more respected higher ups. He has not made any agitation about our movement publicly known, and has the odious distinction of having been involved in a violation (by our estimation) of M.1, and as such is unlikely to be behind machinations to displace anybody.
S. Samuel: (Unknown) Samuel, the by-laws-enforcement official, is a frank mockery of man who is transparent and easily bullied. Wright has no respect for him, and while he will make noise about his desire to deal with you, he will be disarmed if you are courageous enough to make noise back.
A. Clarke: (M) This is an individual whose import seems specific to our particular sub-group, and to little else. Clarke is a man who seemingly fills the position of sub-group leader for group M, given the absence of the actual sub-group from visible politics. We anticipate that he is either a catspaw, or an overly ambitious neonate seeking to make a name for him self. His particular brand of instability seems to include delusions of grandeur, and he alternates between being very jovial and very critical. He simultaneously tows and doesn't tow the party line, and gets snippy when challenged. As long as you play up to his sense of ego, you should remain in his good graces.
Aside from that, NYC has a vibrant independent community which seems flatly indifferent or even sympathetic to the movement's rhetoric, and a number of young IT members who seem to go along with whoever barks loudest. The general impression that the "troublesome" officials give is that they would like to do something but can't, and Wright is honestly the sort who will tolerate you fully if you are willing to be non-confrontational initially, and tolerate you partially so long as you obey the letter of the law.
- Go to the Documents Page