(Lamer's Disclaimer:- Yes, I'm making generalisations here. Yes, Anonymous are a large group of a lot of different people, yes I'm talking in
stereotypes, and yes I probably don't know crap, blah blah. This is purely my own observation)
So after seeing that my last rant about ATS' misconceptions of Anonymous apparently fell on deaf ears, I'm back with volume 2. Hopefully, this one
will successfully Deny (at least some) Ignorance.
Originally posted by lacrimaererum
Ok, so its in hoax. Nothing I can do about that.
I am still perplexed by this story. After all the good work this week with Wikileaks and the GIFiles I really don't know why anon would come up with
something like this.
is why. If you think Anonymous only exist in order to help and
benefit the public, you don't know anything about them at all.
Anonymous are not Han Solo or Robin Hood. You need to think Chaotic Neutral
Newfag (that is, Chanology and after) Anonymous often see themselves as public benefactors or wannabe Chaotic Good superheroes, yes. Pre-Chanology
Anonymous generally do not. They commit an act purely because it amuses them, and they don't care in the slightest whether the consequences of said
act are positive or negative to anyone else. Because they were usually sociopaths, they'd likely prefer it to be the latter, in fact. The new
school, as another point of contrast, are more and more left anarchist, more and more merged with Occupy, and more and more concerned with offline
operations. The old school were generally too entropic to care about politics at all, but often pretended to be Nazi sympathisers or racists, purely
in order to attempt to traumatise people.
The only thing that the two groups have in common, is a desire to protect the Internet. However, even with this, they have very different
motivations. The old school want to do it so that the lulz
(defined originally with
sadistic/sociopathic connotations - READ that link) can continue. The new school, broadly speaking, are motivated by the "common good," angle, as
well as by a superhero complex and/or the idea that they can be more empowered to create positive change when the mask is on, than when it is off.
You also can't generalise about which of these two factions are responsible for a given act, operation, or whatever. The newfags might help
Wikileaks out of a desire to be altruistic or to fight corporations and governments; but just as easily, the old school might do it because leaks tend
to be extremely destabilising, and the one thing that the old school primarily love, is chaos or entropy, purely for its' own sake. We're talking
practically applied and turned
up to eleven
Ditto with the Galactic Federation of Light stuff. Remember that Anonymous can be anyone at all, which potentially even blows my model above,
completely out of the water. That means that it's entirely possible that someone within Anonymous believes in Ashtar. That might not jibe with your
(and my) image of the archetypical Anon, no; but then again, maybe that's entirely the point. The oldfags in particular do not like anyone being
able to define them or pin them down.
The point of all this, is to stop thinking of Anonymous as though they're a national government. Whenever you people see a single YouTube video with
the word Anonymous on it, you immediately think that that video is the gospel truth, and applies to every single individual who identifies themselves
as an Anon.
It may not apply to literally any other individual at all, other than the person who uploaded it. Your problem is that
you haven't upgraded your own cognitive model of what Anonymous are.