Fact check: What role does technology play in contemporary anarchist movements versus historical ones?

1. What people are claiming — clear competing narratives that matter

Analyses of recent incidents and historical accounts reveal three key claims: first, that some contemporary anarchists actively oppose AI and large-scale tech projects, evidenced by direct action and vandalism at events; second, that another vein of anarchism uses technology as an emancipatory toolkit—open-source software, digital fabrication, and educational networks—to build decentralized infrastructures; third, that historical anarchist tech-targeting (notably CLODO in the 1980s) provides precedent and cultural memory for present tactics. These claims are reported across multiple items from September 2025 back to earlier documentary work, showing both continuity and divergence in orientation toward technology ^{[1] [2] [3] [4] [5]}.

2. How history informs today — the CLODO precedent and its afterlife

Documentary and journalistic pieces on CLODO recount a campaign in the 1980s when French anarchists carried out arson and sabotage against firms tied to computing and surveillance, combining material attacks with satirical communiques. The historical record frames these acts as targeted responses to the militarization and surveillance potentials of emerging computing, and the story has been re-examined in 2025 as a lens on computation, archives, and political mythology. The CLODO case is invoked today as a tangible precedent for anti-tech direct action, shaping memory and sometimes inspiring imitators or symbolic references ^{[3] [4] [5]}.

3. Immediate examples from 2025 — confronting AI in the streets

Multiple 2025 reports describe masked actors vandalizing vehicles and an AI networking event in Portland, spray-painting slogans like “Fuck AI” and references to a “Butlerian Jihad Against AI,” signaling an explicit antagonism toward contemporary AI development. These actions demonstrate that for some anarchists, advanced AI is perceived as a concentrated threat—a new axis of surveillance, labor displacement, and hierarchical control—prompting disruptive tactics rather than attempts at technological appropriation ^[1].

4. The techno-embrace: mutual aid, open-source, and prefigurative politics

Contrasting with anti-tech direct action, sources from September and December 2025 document anarchist-oriented projects that treat technology as a means to autonomy: mutual aid networks, open-source software, digital fabrication, and educational skill-sharing appear as practical tools for building self-governed, ecologically minded communities. These techno-anarchist strategies emphasize prefiguration—building the alternative within the present—using technology to decentralize resources and reduce dependency on corporate systems rather than rejecting tools wholesale ^{[2] [6]}.

5. Tactics, rhetoric, and the role of symbolism in tech-targeting

Across historical and contemporary accounts, attacks on technology combine material tactics (arson, vandalism) with performative elements—graffiti, humorous communiques, and symbolic language—that aim to communicate a political critique to broader publics. The blending of satire and sabotage in CLODO’s legacy and the explicit slogans at recent actions show how symbolic framing amplifies impact and signals ideological alignment, while also inviting debates about legitimacy, public safety, and political effectiveness ^{[4] [5] [1]}.

6. Communication infrastructures: social media, video activism, and organizing

Contemporary anarchist groups leverage video collectives and social platforms to disseminate narratives, train participants, and coordinate mutual aid, even as they criticize surveillance-capitalist platforms. The sub.Media collective’s work exemplifies using audiovisual production to inspire prefigurative politics, while other actors selectively use social media marketing techniques to mobilize sympathizers. This dual use—exploiting tools while critiquing their companies and logics—is a pragmatic pattern in recent 2025 reporting ^{[6] [7]}.

7. Divergent philosophies and visible agendas shaping tactics

The evidence points to a spectrum rather than a single position: some anarchists articulate a radical anti-tech ideology rooted in anti-capitalist and anti-state analysis, while others pursue technological autonomy and resilience. These divisions reflect deeper strategic disagreements—whether to destroy nodes of power, to build alternatives within reach, or to combine both approaches contextually. Reporting and documentary work show both tactical pluralism and the potential for symbolic lineage between past and present actors ^{[1] [2] [3] [5]}.

8. Bottom line — continuities, changes, and what’s left unsaid

The contemporary landscape exhibits both continuity with historical anti-tech actions and a notable expansion of techno-positive experimentation, driven by new tools and urgent social needs. What remains under-discussed in these accounts is the measurable efficacy of each approach in achieving long-term goals, the internal debates over ethical boundaries of direct action, and how networks scale sustainably. The 2025 sources collectively show a movement negotiating between rejection and appropriation of technology—an ongoing tension likely to shape tactics and rhetoric in years ahead ^{[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6]}.