The following essay is an example of making a serious criticism, with the sometimes irritatingly detailed recitation of events that that can include. But besides the rigor that has apparently gone into this account, it also raises three topics that are in need of more discussion amongst anarchists:
a) the role of academics,
b) soft policing, what it means and what it looks like, and
c) letting friends slide, despite evidence of serious complicity with the state.
We live in a world in which accusations get easier and easier to make, with the concomitant burnout. The state gets more and more savvy about using that against us; cointelpro being only the most notorious salvo in that direction. The burnout and cynicism that protects us in some ways, makes it hard to gauge accusations that deserve to be taken more seriously. How do we determine if something is serious? And then how do we respond if it is? These are assessments that have to be asked every time this kind of question is raised, because every scenario is different. But this essay reminds us that they're important to make, that what we do is meaningful and worth paying attention to.