Anonymous: What Is The Plan? (in Off-topic)

This video is a couple months old now but I just happened to stumble across it today. I liked it so I thought that I'd share it in case anyone else is also an Anonymous supporter.



I have to say I've been in agreement with much of what was said by the speaker in the video long before Anon or this video even existed, but that's just me and my personal views.

Feel free to debate/discuss, I'm interested in what others think about what was said in the video and about Anon in general.

I watched the whole thing. I prefer to make my stand with God. Obeying the government in everything except sin.

Some of the stated complaints are certainly true but since God has allowed the authority (at least temporarily) to those in authority, the proper course is to obey in everything except sin.

God will deal with the overwhelming abuses of the power to govern which has been granted by Him to the leaders just as He has throughout human history.

Its better to be on God's side rather than on any other.

Im pro anon :) watched a few minutes of it but as much as i agree/disagree with what anon does (both the good and the bad stuff)i had to turn it off after 4 minutes.
Society might be run/screwed over by banks, global businesses etc but that was just grumbling way to much about most aspects of it.
There are now to many people in the world for us not to have rules and an attempt at conformity we can only hope that those that take advantage of people get caught and punished.
I dont believe in god (though i do like/agree/wonder about Hawkins arguement for god) but hoping the bad people get punished after they are dead by going to hell seems stupid to me - why would a god let people carry on being evil or to encourage people to join anon and carry out his retributuion?

Anon is a great idea/group of people but is as flawed as the people they are taking on the only difference is when anon is doing right they are usually standing against the big companies that everyone else lets push them around.
Anon members get arrested for attacks on companies helping to hurt wikileaks but botnets/dos are still attacking wikileaks and yet not one arrest for that - the same goes for other websites like wiki

I haven't really created an opinion on an Anon b/c of my lack of knowledge of them, on face value I have been opposed to them, but I don't really like taking a stance against something unless I am fully aware of what it is....

However, this video, can be best described by this related video:

For those not willing to wait 10mins. These are NOT the hackers you are looking for.
For those posting random gifs/vids/pics that don't relate at all.

Gun, did you watch the video? B/c I did.... It was a lot of whining... like the entire video. I'm almost betting that you didn't watch it.

This should be a clue.
To call this guy a whiny emo for what he hates in the world isn't a good joke and I'm perplexed as to why you took my pic seriously but not sad-sack V. =/

"To call this guy a whiny emo for what he hates in the world isn't a good joke"

Well I found it funny, you:



There, is that more in line with your ever so enlightening sense of humor?

Here I made a new verse for you:

I hate my job, I have no free time.
Everyday of my life is the same old grind
I want to fight the system,
and stick it the man...

nananananana

I must be emo

I don't show my face, and I hack twitter...

nananananana

I must be emo

~7:15-10:00 is the main point of the video I would think. Like said in the video Anonymous is not a group or an organization, it is an idea. It is the idea behind anonymous that I happen to agree with.

If you see a video of a whining kid that is your opinion I suppose, but to smack the label "emo" on it seems quite dismissive to me, as the majority of he goes on to mention have to do with global issues and have little to do with himself.

This is an even better example of what the idea of anonymous is all about. Much shorter and more to the point.

Well that definitely was a lot less emo than the first one, although I didn't like the voice...

I've never had any problems with the ideals of Anonymous, more a problem with how they strive to achieve those ideals. I don't believe that ends justify means, yet from actions take under "anonymous" this seems to be the case for them/him/her/it.

This is precisely the problem. You hit the nail on the head.


I mean, really?
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2011-10-05/anonymous-vows-nyse-attack-to-support-wall-street-protests.html

I think the second video addresses both your concerns. And the actions taken by anonymous are 0, anonymous is not a group it is an idea. Different people have different ideas of how action should be taken, this second video explains how we, the peers and other anons on the internet react to certain things that people do under the guise of anon and decide for ourselves whether that is what we want to support or not.

All the things that you guys are knocking against, like 'Anon' taking down PSN or vowing to attack the NYSE, those are all individuals who think that is the right thing to do in the interest of the people. It was not 'Anon' that did those things, it was an individual(s).

I mean I really cant add too much more, the videos describe themselves pretty well in my opinion, and even makes mention of the fact that there will be a few bad apples in any bunch.

There is another video that describes behavior procedures to follow during Anon related protests, and every single bit of it preaches non-violence, compliance with law enforcement, and basically frowns on anything that will give 'Anonymous' a bad wrap or hurt the cause. But it says that if people fall out of line with these basic rules of etiquette then they alone will suffer the consequences.

Quite frankly, while anonymous may be an idea, it is also a group. You can pretend it's just an idea, but that's trying to merge wishful thinking with reality, and doesn't really have any place in a real discussion.

Hey morons! Want to know how to ruin a perfectly good thread? Post crap like this over and over again: I would have had an interest in learning about the topic and contributing something here. But now it looks like a really bad myspace page, and I can't take the discussion seriously. Apologies to Xeno for furthering the hijack, but crap like this really annoys the heck out of me.

Its ok LB, I wish that the thread didn't devolve into that as I was hoping to have an actual discussion on the subject.


The reason anon is an idea and not a group is that there is no centralized location for it, there is no one running it. It is the idea of true freedom of knowledge and information. Part of the ideas of anon advocate freedom of speech and privacy. The people who represent anon are just that, people. They are using the idea/guise of anon to gain attention to their causes and to also keep their identities a secret. Whether or not people agree with them, is up to that individual or group of individuals. That is exactly what the second video explains in my opinion.

Again its very very hard to stress the fact that it is -not- a group! Its confusing in a way, and I understand this, but just because a group of people using the guise and ideas of anonymous claim to be 'anonymous' does not make it a group.

Being a group implies that there is some sort of order or structure.

The claim of being 'Anonymous' is well explained in the second video.

I'm going to butcher this quote a LOT, IE: Make it somewhat my own interpretation, but its from the second video I believe.

"You can arrest or silence one individual, multiple individuals, maybe even hundreds of individuals, but not thousands of people, hundreds of thousands, millions of people. You can't silence all the people who share a similar ideas. People may die, but that idea lives on. An idea can't die if it lives on in the hearts and minds of people."

Xenogard, if you held an idea we'll call it Madeupism. And you believe in it and tell others about it. Then a group calls themselves Madeupists, and starts doing things that you don't agree with and might even go against your own beliefs, would you continue to call yourself a Madeupist?
Unless other groups that represent Anonymous start showing themselves and going against what the other public front of Anonymous is doing, then that is how they will be perceived by the public. A group that disregards rules and laws and tries to get their goals by any means. If people want this not to be what Anonymous means, then they will have to do something about it. As it currently stands, I do not support Anonymous, b/c currently their actions go against my beliefs. I'm not against the "beliefs" per se of this video, but against the actions taken by the "group" Anonymous. Whether or not you believe Anonymous can be a group or not, it is. A group of people are taking action under the name Anonymous, and are therefor currently representing Anonymous. It doesn't matter if you believe otherwise.

http://www.thinq.co.uk/2011/5/10/anonops-accuses-coup-leader-bullying/

http://www.technologyreview.com/printer_friendly_article.aspx?id=37572


It's a group, Xeno. You're falling for what amounts to homemade internet propaganda. Anonymous is run by AnonOps is organized in an IRC is backdoor led by a small group in a private channel.

You really need to quit associating this to the hackers when they say in that video, you claim to have watched, they are not them.

It doesn't matter who they are, if you read my post, which you never claimed to do actually. Public image matters Gun. If you are an Anonymous supporter you are a supporter. Quit trolling.

I support:

White Supremacists.

But, here's what my version of White Supremacy is:

Equality for all.



You see how that doesn't work.

The irony is palpable.

Anon itself isn't a group, but a group can represent it.

Yes public image is indeed important, which is why many anon videos say that hurting the image of anon hurts the cause, but it is the indivuals who make those choices not 'Anon'.

The second video CLEARLY explains that the actions people take under the guise of anon will be publicly talked about and debated on the internet for people to decide if they indeed support or do not support that specific groups actions under the guise of Anon.


OB I literally just take those two articles and again point the to fact that no one controls Anon, hell the second article you posted made that very very clear in my opinion.

Yes Xeno, but if the most vocal and public figures are voicing opinions that go against what you belief, how long would you claim to believe in the same idea that they do as well. Why not come up with another for it? I do believe in a lot of the same principles as Anonymous, but I do not support Anonymous. Why? B/c the way they are presented to the public doesn't align with my views. It doesn't matter whether or not these people don't truly display what Anon is. They are the most public, therefore if you say you support Anon, you will be aligned with them according to most people.

No because there are plenty of other examples of protests done under the guise of anon that have absolutely nothing to do with hacking or the types of things that you talk about, those are less heard about in the media as the media likes to focus on the absolute negative side of anything. So yes in the media Anon is portrayed as a group of hackers who do things that are not in line with what you think is right.

Guess what, neither do I, and I'm being vocal about it being a supporter of the idea that Anon is by saying its wrong and that's not what the entire idea is about. But do I get public attention from that? No I do not, the most obvious public attention comes from the people who are the bad seeds doing the things that people disagree with.

The entire point is for other groups to come back at them and say no this is wrong, that's not what we support or represent. That's what I feel the entire second video explains I don't see how I'm not getting that across.

I watched the second video, twice, I guess I just don't agree with it. Seeing that we aren't really making any progress with this discussion, I want to go off on a little tangent.

I noticed in the first video they discussed non-violent resistance, as step 4 I believe. What I was wondering, does this include non-illegal, non-violent activities, or just non-violent? Are they okay with doing illegal non-violent activities?

Non-illegal non-violent. But they clearly state the actions some people will take may indeed be illegal and they do not represent what the idea of anon is all about.

There are many more videos I found, but you could search you tube all day and find them. The most important part in my mind, is that everything is done by a single or group of individuals, nothing is done on a grand scale as a mass collective.

Anyone, anyone at all, can start up a cause and use the guise of Anon. Its up to the public and other anon supporters to decide whether or not they agree and they support it.

As far as this is concerned, I'd say it completely depends on the situation. I personally couldn't throw a blanket over all the possible illegal actions someone could take.

Because I for one am against certain laws and disagree with them. I will literally say to hell with the law if I disagree with it. That is my personal opinion on it.

...The article describes what amounts to a power struggle within the leadership of the group.

Why did you say "feel free to debate/discuss" when you are already clearly well-entrenched in your happy idea of what anonymous is and are unwilling to recognize evidence to the contrary?

OB, There may have been a central starting point for it, but that doesn't mean that was the -only- point of reference for anything anon related. The article also states that anyone can start an AnonOP and that no one can stop the way it spreads. Its a hive mind that spreads out through the internet, the idea has caught on and its spreading.

When did I ever imply you weren't free to debate and discuss all you want?

I'm backing up my -opinion- of what the -idea- of anon represents to -me- based on these videos. I'm also sitting here telling you I disagree with the negative actions of those few, but as a whole the ideas expressed in these videos I DO agree with.

OB just to be clear I read both the links you posted thoroughly, and I think we both are interpreting these articles differently.

Yes there are places where people who have similar views that anonymous share come together, its advertised all over the youtube how to get in touch with other anonymous people, much like we all come here because we like CB. That doesn't mean there is a hierarchy to it, its simply a place for people to go to communicate.

The term 'Anonymous' has more then one use in my opinion.