Advertisement
by Nadia C.
www.crimethinc.com/texts/se...sfuck.php
<<Perhaps it is time for a new word for "politics," since you have made such a swear word out of the old one. For no one should be put off when we talk about acting together to improve our lives. And so we present to you our demands, which are non-negotiable, and must be met as soon as possible—because we're not going to live forever, are we?>>
www.crimethinc.com/texts/se...sfuck.php
<<Perhaps it is time for a new word for "politics," since you have made such a swear word out of the old one. For no one should be put off when we talk about acting together to improve our lives. And so we present to you our demands, which are non-negotiable, and must be met as soon as possible—because we're not going to live forever, are we?>>
posted by:
|
Indiana
|
Advertisement
Advertisement
-
Replacing the word "politics" with "life" helped me a lot. It helps cut away most of the bullshit theorising and ideological chains when one if thinking about one's life instead of one's politics.
-
-
POLITICS are the name of their game....
....not my game....
...json -
-
I think this article makes several good points. However, I disagree with it on several other points. I read an article countering this one time posted on another Anarchist site with an altered phrase "Your politics are Bourgeois as Fuck".
If we look at the civil rights movement for Black Americans, womens liberation, the 40 hour work week which was fought for by the IWW and the Haymarket Anarchists, we see that political organizing and class struggle was necessary for those victories. Sometimes violence was necessary in self defense, or at least non-violent sabotage. These struggles were NOT theoretical and boring, but relevant to the present moment.
Here is a list of what I dont like about this article.
1. It suggests that Anarchists are necessarily preaching completely theoretical and irrelevant ideas. There are certainly examples of this, but we can alternately look at how the IWW is still organizing unions such as New York Starbuks. Its an over generalization and not entirely factual. There are plenty of relevant Anarchist causes, from Anti-Racist-Action, to Earth First and the various Libertarians Fronts, to Indigenous organizations, to labor organizing, to prison reform. These POLITiCAL causes are not irrelevant, and are only boring to the apathetic.
2. It suggests that participation is on the decline, that its because the projects of these groups are boring and irrelevant, then claims that it has a solution. However, it offers no evidence that turnout is on the decline, that participants find it boring, or that Anarchist and other radical groups are not working on worthwhile relevant causes.
3. It suggests that having fun while organizing is more important than results. Having fun is important, but making it the primary objective is a bourgeois priority that is more likely to attract white middle class dropouts than the people who are really getting the short end of capitalism. For some people whose families have been torn apart by the drug war, prison reform and being reunited with their families is a priority beyond merely having fun while thumbing your nose at the system.
4. It suggests that tactics like serving free food via food not bombs may be more worthwhile than organizing a general strike, or taking that a step further to organize worker controlled collectives. While I love Food Not Bombs and do participate, I dont think its a long term solution for much of anything. At best it slightly reduces consumption, but its no replacement for class struggle.
The point where I do agree with them though, and agree with strongly, is that our politics do in fact need to be connected to real world struggles that are relevant to peoples lives
-
-
-
<<<What should be political? Whether we enjoy what we do to get food and shelter. Whether we feel like our daily interactions with our friends, neighbors, and coworkers are fulfilling. Whether we have the opportunity to live each day the way we desire to. And "politics" should consist not of merely discussing these questions, but of acting directly to improve our lives in the immediate present.>>>
amen. -
-
Large scale victories that improve peoples lives often require coordinated efforts, time and devotion to attain. Its not always the thing that feels good in the moment, and its not always enough to run away from or avoid the things that confine us. Sometimes the instruments of oppression need to be reformed if not destroyed and replaced.
Of course when the time comes to take action, then all we have is the present moment and the task in front of us. There is perhaps a difference between the nowness of a warrior who makes every act count but is still guided by principles of altruism, and the nowness of somebody who is completely consumed by the desire for self gratification.
-
-
-
i'm totally at a loss as to how to change anything on a grand scale at this point. but i see two or five or twenty or a few hundred people successfully pulling off saner lives and modelling that for others. maybe small is the way to go. or a way to go.
-
-
If the goal is to teach others, then you need media tactics to spread the word. This doesnt have to be corporate media, but there are ways of provoking the corporate media to cover your issues. Otherwise there is independent and underground media.
Something along the lines of teaching others that there is a better way to live is a plan I have to form an egalitarian eco-village that is collectively owned as a co-op and run according to Anarcho-Socialist principles, but still taking a unique form appropriate to the present moment. This would not be idle conversation about the nuances between Kropotkin and Proudhon, but we might in fact discuss Tuckers descriptions of the economics of mutualism used by the Anarchists who took over Barcelona, but only because we can use some* of their ideas to model something new in the present moment. I want to create a video documentary about what an Anarchist community would look like in person, not on paper.
I am confident that things will change on a grand scale whether we want them to or not. I dont think there is any way to avoid massive wars, poverty, destruction, environmental contamination, and all kinds of fucked up shit that is likely coming our way. With the decline of fossil fuels and global conflicts with roots in the middle east as the dollar plummets in value, I think its safe to assume that there are going to be major upheavals whether we take an active role or not. However, if we choose to play an active role, we may be able to help direct what some of these changes might look like and for the better. I enjoy living my life for a cause. Its not dreary or tiresome for me, but if it is for somebody else then we probably dont need them as they wont be much help.
Crimethic is blatantly hypocritical and contradictory. One month they are writing flyers to promote protests, and the next they write that protests are a waste of time. One month they are telling people how to how to train hope and travel for free, the next they are "purging" traveler kids from their network because they are unproductive. One day they are talking shit about so called radical artists who sign record deals to sell to the mainstream, the next they are selling their books at Walmart. One minute they issue these radical calls to arms because "Something Needs to be Done!!!", and the next they say to give up activism and live for your own pleasure instead. Where do they stand? Are their writers bi-polar and schizophrenic?
Some* of what they write about I can appreciate, but I think they are overrated. Most of the stuff that sounds good they basically copied and pasted from situationist English translations then summarized it.
But anyway, Im not content just to live for my own pleasure and excitement only. I want to be part of something larger, and I think I have it in me to make it happen.
This article represents some of my thoughts, but I dont agree with it entirely. For one thing, I dont know if its productive or accurate to say they are not Anarchists. I also find projects like food not bombs worthwhile, but not revolutionary. Otherwise, he is addressing some of my major concerns with the crimethinc philosophy.
www.anarkismo.net/newswire.php
This next article offers are very bitting criticism that I agree with whole heartedly. A little long the long side, but it compares Crimethins DOLNOL to the book they stole the title from, Days and Nights of Love and War, and uses that comparison to spell out exactly what is wrong with the crimethinc ideology. Better than the first one in my opinion.
flag.blackened.net/revolt/a...rror.html
-
-
That article was boring as fuck.
I didn't even make it through the first 100 lines. -
-
It was very long. If you dont particularity like reading, reading long articles might not be "fun". It did however illustrate some of my thoughts as to why I went from being a major fan of the crimethinc collective to having almost no respect for their positions and tactics.
I am a collectivist and green Anarchist. While I dont necessarily think we are going to have a nation wide Anarchist uprising any time soon (Baring some external catalyzing event that affects the system), I do feel that activism is not only worthwhile but important. You CAN save a forest through tree spiking. You CAN organize union in Starbucks IWW style in a way that directly benefits impoverished workers. I reject the idea that personal liberation is preferable to collective liberation. The two go hand in hand, but so long as we are alone we cant create a better society but merely go against the grain or slip through the cracks of the current one. I want more than that, and I have faith in my ability to make it happen, so long as I have comrades to make it happen with me.
I have a different set of priorities than do the writers of the crimethinc collective.
-
-
La Realidad
What is the difference between reality and fantasy… and the physical and metaphysical? Is there a difference? Here is the story of La Realidad… reality… and what it’s like in "A Place Called Chiapas" video.google.com/videoplay a 1 ½ hour film. A faster intro is in this article by Naomi Klein www.thenation.com/doc/20080107/klein
The mythology … folklore and fakelore, the personality cult… God, Jesus, Santa Claus, Subcomandante Marcos en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subc...nte_Marcos … vote for hoodie or loodie… maybe Chiapas and places like them reveal the difference between metaphysical hope and comfortable binkie-suck. Compare the Priest and the Bishop.
Then there are the “Social Dominators.” www.commondreams.org/views06/0811-36.htm <<They don’t believe much in right or wrong – it’s more about what they can get away with.>> Maybe that’s why Pastor Neutics at the Megachurch resembles a defensecorp CEO. It certainly explains the fucktards who simply can’t understand why doing anything possible to “maximize profit” www.naomiklein.org/articles...as-spoken might be undesirable: Clean environment or prisons? Sheeit. The “smart money” is on prisons and “security.” <<"I also see this as a more attractive sector, as many do, than clean energy.">> Hey fucktard… is that a spare planet in your pocket, or did you just get a “bonus dividend?” Usually “social dominators” don’t even bother to bullshit… unless they get paid extra.
The good news is, as resources dwindle- the SDs begin to eat each other (see “Chiapas”). The bad news is, the rest of us are on the gnawbone pile long before that happens. They’re now on the final frontier… hiring thugs who are either small-time social dominators or (like most USAns) followers who will grasp at any asshat “ideology” (and actually “believe” it) that keeps them comfy AND blinds them to the misery of others. SDs really don’t fucking care… unless they’re a “double high.”
Is there a difference between the sweet bullshit that gives hope to the miserable and oppressed and the cheesy bullshit that makes the fatties more comfy-wumfy? Maybe if one is willing to suffer for the sake of one’s bullshit… it might NOT be bullshit. Faith that moves mountains and all that. Or… it might be bullshit of the worst possible kind.
Maybe that’s La Realidad.
-
-
This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.Just to be clear, Im not saying that the crimethinc philosophy is "wrong". I do think some of their historical representations are dumbed down and inaccurate, but the positions are just as valid as any other position. The thing about crimethic that doesnt work for me personally is the emphasis on personal liberation at the exclusion of collective liberation, rather than as a compliment to collective liberation. At times they hint at working towards class struggle (As long as its fun) , and at other times they reject the very notion of collective struggle to attain victories for the under class. They also seem hostile towards the working class and seem to blame the working poor for their own conditions on the grounds that if your not having fun your not living in poverty correctly. To consider poverty fun is a position that stinks of upper middle class teenage rebellion. Its the kind of position that somebody might hold if they have never had a terminal illness without healthcare insurance, or never had their children taken away because of homelessness.
Some* of crimethics work does hint at real activism. I suspect that I might really get along with one or two of their core writers, and absolutely cannot stand at least one of their other core members. -
-
Unsu...
Sentinel writes, "The thing about crimethic that doesnt work for me personally is the emphasis on personal liberation at the exclusion of collective liberation, rather than as a compliment to collective liberation. At times they hint at working towards class struggle (As long as its fun) , and at other times they reject the very notion of collective struggle to attain victories for the under class. They also seem hostile towards the working class and seem to blame the working poor for their own conditions on the grounds that if your not having fun your not living in poverty correctly."
This makes CrimethInc. seem almost capitalist libertarian. -
-
Crimethinc in fact has been accused of being quasi capitalist, especially after they were selling their books at walmart. I also suspect they were lying when they claimed they didnt turn a profit. Of course working or creating to survive is not wrong as we are forced to live under an oppressive economic system. Living out of dumpsters is not a solution for the entire under class, though a small minority might be able to escape work that way.
I always feel bad though stating negative opinions about crimethinc. They do make some* good points, and the points I agree with are stated artfully and poetically. They do have a way of making anarchism seem fun and interesting. I think their shortcommings however are serious enough that they should be talked about and put under the light of scrutiny.
There are a lot of awesome people who have associated at one time or another with the crimethinc movement, myself included. However, I came to a point where I decided the literature was promoting the opposite of what is really needed.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Following this thread has led me to consider: The intentionality of Baudrillard's “theory” is to simulate, grasp, and anticipate future historical events, that he believes are moving further faster beyond the pace of all contemporary theory to analyze and determine. Our current situation is more fantastic than the most fanciful science fiction, or theoretical projections of a futurist society. ... For Baudrillard, the twin towers of the World Trade Center in New York also symbolized the frozen history and stasis between the two systems of capitalism and communism. The Lakota called this the Begging Way, the frozen way. As such humor is not necessarily an inappropriate strategy to use to attack those that are still playing freeze tag.
DENNIS: What I object to is you automatically treat me like an inferior!
ARTHUR: Well, I AM king...
DENNIS: Oh king, eh, very nice. An' how'd you get that, eh? By
exploitin' the workers -- by 'angin' on to outdated imperialist dogma
which perpetuates the economic an' social differences in our society!
If there's ever going to be any progress--
WOMAN: Dennis, there's some lovely filth down here. Oh -- how d'you do?
ARTHUR: How do you do, good lady. I am Arthur, King of the Britons.
Who's castle is that?
WOMAN: King of the who?
ARTHUR: The Britons.
WOMAN: Who are the Britons?
ARTHUR: Well, we all are. we're all Britons and I am your king.
WOMAN: I didn't know we had a king. I thought we were an autonomous
collective.
DENNIS: You're fooling yourself. We're living in a dictatorship.
A self-perpetuating autocracy in which the working classes--
WOMAN: Oh there you go, bringing class into it again.
DENNIS: That's what it's all about if only people would--
ARTHUR: Please, please good people. I am in haste. Who lives
in that castle?
WOMAN: No one live there.
ARTHUR: Then who is your lord?
WOMAN: We don't have a lord.
ARTHUR: What?
DENNIS: I told you. We're an anarcho-syndicalist commune. We take
it in turns to act as a sort of executive officer for the week.
ARTHUR: Yes.
DENNIS: But all the decision of that officer have to be ratified
at a special biweekly meeting.
ARTHUR: Yes, I see.
DENNIS: By a simple majority in the case of purely internal affairs,--
ARTHUR: Be quiet!
DENNIS: --but by a two-thirds majority in the case of more--
ARTHUR: Be quiet! I order you to be quiet!
WOMAN: Order, eh -- who does he think he is?
ARTHUR: I am your king!
WOMAN: Well, I didn't vote for you.
ARTHUR: You don't vote for kings.
WOMAN: Well, 'ow did you become king then?
ARTHUR: The Lady of the Lake,
[angels sing]
her arm clad in the purest shimmering samite, held aloft Excalibur
from the bosom of the water signifying by Divine Providence that I,
Arthur, was to carry Excalibur.
[singing stops]
That is why I am your king!
DENNIS: Listen -- strange women lying in ponds distributing swords
is no basis for a system of government. Supreme executive power
derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical
aquatic ceremony.
ARTHUR: Be quiet!
DENNIS: Well you can't expect to wield supreme executive power
just 'cause some watery tart threw a sword at you!
ARTHUR: Shut up!
DENNIS: I mean, if I went around sayin' I was an empereror just
because some moistened bint had lobbed a scimitar at me they'd
put me away!
ARTHUR: Shut up! Will you shut up!
DENNIS: Ah, now we see the violence inherent in the system.
ARTHUR: Shut up!
DENNIS: Oh! Come and see the violence inherent in the system!
HELP! HELP! I'm being repressed!
ARTHUR: Bloody peasant!
DENNIS: Oh, what a give away. Did you hear that, did you hear that,
eh? That's what I'm on about -- did you see him repressing me,
you saw it didn't you?
