Mayday events (1 Viewer)

[Shorty]

as I said one problem at a time.One solution at a time. If all the "socially aware" my dad calls em dogooders(hes a part time nazi) got together and focused on one thing at time we would have a lovely world to live in. THe meetings go like this..

lets help children.
no lets help poor people.
no lets help poor children,
no lets help mothers of poor children,

and so the dilution of good intentions begins.

No lets overthrow capitalism.

 

[jane]

I'm sorry, but how does it assume that? As you have noticed and pointed out, the idea is about creating awareness. I don't think they are attempting to somehow convert all of the regular workers there and for them to somehow up and leave their jobs, but there is also an element of trying to highlight the problem to the general public as well as those inside.


Agreed. But that's an entirely different debate/discussion/idea in itself.


I'm sorry. What? Are you talking about some sort of ethical scepticism/relativism or strange hyper form of tolerance?

What exactly do you mean by this? I'm not sure what you're saying. That to point out that the people who will have to deal with the mess of the red paint, of people causing commotion aren't the offenders is some form of relativistic stance? I'm not sure in what context you're using those words. What do you mean by 'relativism' (I know what it means, but it's a dangerous term to start flinging around the place)? What is 'a strange, hyper form of tolerance?

It's not like the big bosses are going to come down and clean that stuff up themselves. No, it'll be some poorly paid worker who'll have to put in extra time to do it while their bosses manhandle prostitutes and slurp gin rickeys in the Canaries or hoist their bare, adipose guts onto sun-drenched yachts moored off the Adriatic coast.

I'm not saying that there shouldn't be any awareness raised, but that maybe causing trouble for the very same people -- the 'workers' -- with whom you wish to show solidarity might not be the best way to go about it.

This is again an entire new discussion or debate. I don't think ppl are attacking those who work there. But there are levels to which educating ppl and/or then condemning them go. If I see something wrong in the world, should I not speak out? I actually agree totally with what you're saying here, (as in we are brought up in a society that teaches condemnation rather than education, particularly within our "education" system) but it can appear from what you are saying that we shouldn't do anything.

See, this is the kind of thing that gets me. Just because I am critical of the way these things are being carried out -- and maybe if I knew more detail, I'd be more receptive -- you assume that, one, I don't think anything should be done, and two (and worse), that I'm not doing anything myself. I work with educational access programs, developing workshops for primary and secondary school kids from disadvantaged schools as a way of getting them to see that while the social barriers to education might make them feel inadequate, they most certainly have something to offer, that they are anything but stupid. The more I run these things, the more I'm asked to do them, and the harder I try to make them a positive experience for the kids. I am also working on getting involved in some projects that will help to build progressive and inclusive community identities without using the 'top down' methods where the privileged and educated march in and tell people how they can better themselves. I AM doing something, and I am very passionate about what I'm doing, but just because I don't want to go throwing red paint all over the streets, you assumed that I'm part of the problem. That's what I meant by alienating people: if people critique the way you do things, then you accuse them of undermining 'the cause' of global justice.

And aren't these all prolems that they wish to highlight by these actions. It seems to me that if I wanted, I could imply from reading this that you (plural) would kick up a fuss (or whatever you want to choose from the expletives above) if some (insert stereotype) crusty/lefty/student type where to do this to you but if the actual police were you wouldn's. But I'm sure this isn't what you mean, especially considering that thousands of ppl if not more around the globe suffer this on a daily basis.

Yes, I would be pissed off if anyone stopped me on the street and threatened me. I'm pissed off that it happens, I'm angry when I see it happen, and I agree that there should be more awareness of it.

I just think that stopping people randomly on the street and harrassing and humiliating them is not, perhaps, the best way to highlight the problem of people being randomly harrassed and humiliated. These kinds of 'it could just as easily be you' exercises work well in the context of something like an educational workshop, but you can't force people into your protest and expect it to yield the same results.

It is well-intentioned, but your intentions may be overshadowed by the fact that people will feel harrassed and demoralised. Instead of seeing the problem for what it is, they'll just blame you when they're too sidetracked and pissed off to get their errands done on a Saturday afternoon.

Be loud, be overt, be impossible to ignore. Speak up. I wish more people would. But when you want to raise awareness and get people on your side, sometimes you have to make allowances for things, like letting people get their shit in Marks and Spencer. Simply harrassing them, even if, in the context of the harrassment, you present ways in which they can do something about the problem, seems like an unproductive way to go about it. Instead of paying attention to the issue and how it can be dealt with, they'll just be pissed off. That is what I meant by alienating people who don't share your altruism.

Why not try a 'Day of Silence' to highlight the issue of ethnic minorities and disenfranchised people having so little voice? What's usually done is that those involved take a vow of silence for the day, and when someone tries to talk to you, you hand them a card that says, 'I am keeping silent today, to draw attention to the millions of people who are silenced because of [whatever the issue is]' and, on the reverse of the card, you give facts and figures and ways people, as individuals (who may not want to join a 'cause) can do something about it. I'm not saying that this should be the only way, I'm only pointing out an alternative form of raising awareness that might be less intrusive.

All in all, the replies to this post appear to be merely a tyrade of criticisms by two ppl. With very little constructive criticism, apart from Latex Lizzies singularity of vision idea. But isn't that exactly what the socialist party strives for?

I really don't think there was any tirade. I might have responded with a modicum of vitriol, peppered with sarcasm, but certainly not a tirade. Just because we might have been sarcastic and said 'fuck' and 'shit' doesn't mean we weren't trying to be constructive. If you'd paid attention to the criticisms, you'd have noticed that both Lizzie and I care about the same kinds of problems you do, it's just that neither of us agree with the way you appear to want to go about them.

As for the parks, okay, I'd be interested in seeing more about them. We are lucky in Dublin that we do have a fair amount of public space in which people can just relax and appreciate the open space. It might not be public in the way that you want it to be, and it's tragic that FNB can't set up in Stephen's Green, but there are other ways that you could work on this issue in conjunction with occupying the land. Since Dúchas no longer exists as a government body, maybe there is room in the new configuration of departments to start looking at the zoning legislation and help to find ways to make this possible. Obviously, the government isn't just going to open its doors to what you want, but I ask you this: do you know the legal implications of this? Do you know the legislation well enough to find loopholes or ways of amending or changing it? I'm all for public displays of dissatisfaction, but it's also important to know how to speak the language of those whom you oppose.

And as far as capitalism goes, could you define it so we know what it is you want to overthrow? Where does it begin? Where does it end? How can you just 'overthrow' something that is such an inherent part of the way that people perceive the world around them? It isn't an economic system that exists in isolation, and I don't just mean that it goes hand in hand with political and social injustice. It is part of the way the world has been perceived and social relationships constituted since the 16th century. How can you just 'overthrow' that? I agree that abuses of the system have created glaring and horrific inequalities, and that just because the problems are huge and deeply-entrenched in our worldviews, that we just shouldn't try. No one argued that.

But just because I'm not a socialist or an anarchist doesn't mean I'm the enemy. Maybe if you spent more time listening to what other people were saying, you'd see that the whole world isn't against you, that people are interested in working towards change, but that we don't all agree with how it should be done.

Isn't pluralism, in politics as well as in society, part of the sense of social justice for which you purport to fight? If not, well, then in this utopian world you seem to want to create, where is the place for those of us who agreed with you in principle but not in method?

 

[jane]

Actually, now that I've gone back over my previous posts, I don't think I said anything that would warrant your defensive attitude. In fact, I said that a lot of the things seemed like good ideas, though some might require more thinking-through. That's not unconstructive.


See what you did there? You got all accusatory on my ass, instead of doing what would have been more productive, which would be to explain further. And that made me not want to take part. You can't just expect people to take your word for it.

So now I get to be all sarcastic:

Overthrow capitalism? What time's that on? Do I have time to get a sandwich?
Ok, now I feel better.

 

[Latex lizzie]

No lets overthrow capitalism.

..yeah and shortly afterwards we'll have a fight with the wind.Might as well.

 

[jane]

..yeah and shortly afterwards we'll have a fight with the wind.Might as well.

Let's declare war war on GREED!

Look out greed I'm-a comin 'a getchya!

Ooooh lordy!

Sorry again. I promise. It won't (by which I mean, 'will') happen again.

 

[redflaremist]

I'm not sure about the painting businesses red thing, partly because the people who will actually be on the premises will generally be just the people who work there because they need a job. To subject them to humiliation because of where they work doesn't seem fair -- it assumes that they not only knew that the company was invovled with making and/or transporting arms, but that they condone it. It also assumes that it's wrong of someone to choose to work somewhere when the choice is between that and no job at all.

It has nothing to do with them.

The Mayday event isn't targeting the people who work in the premises, it's targeting the business itself. In the same way that anti McDonalds actions dont slate the workers because people realise that sometimes you have to take a job in order to survive - they slate the company for its practises.

I'd also question exactly how painting the street around a business is subjecting a worker in the place to humiliation. And ultimately, if we're worried about making a couple of workers slightly upset, when the companies involved are involved in the business of murdering and maiming innocent people, then we'll get nowhere with anti war campaigns because we are constantly thinking about being nice and polite before challenging anything.

The street theatre will be put on solely by participants in the protests.

Shorty has already covered the issue of "Public" parks.

 

[Shorty]

What exactly do you mean by this?

Sorry, the word I should have used was subjectivism. Ethics is a case of right and wrong(?) not a case of what's personally right and wrong for you and what's right and wrong for me (though even I'm not sure of this as it is something I am still now learning more about and reading up on). I haven't assumed anything, far from it, but I said that it is possible that I or anyone else for that matter could assume or imply from what you have said that I have some form of personal "altruistic ethics" that I shouldn't even let other ppl know about or even act upon those beliefs/ethics, when in fact what you were saying is that I shouldn't be condemning ppl for not living up to those ethics but inform and educate them.

It's not like the big bosses are going to come down and clean that stuff up themselves. No, it'll be some poorly paid worker who'll have to put in extra time to do it while their bosses manhandle prostitutes and slurp gin rickeys in the Canaries or hoist their bare, adipose guts onto sun-drenched yachts moored off the Adriatic coast.

I'm not saying that there shouldn't be any awareness raised, but that maybe causing trouble for the very same people -- the 'workers' -- with whom you wish to show solidarity might not be the best way to go about it.

I have never claimed any sort of belief in this mythical "working class" as some sort of sole agent of revolutionary change. However I do understand where you are coming from.

See, this is the kind of thing that gets me. Just because I am critical of the way these things are being carried out -- and maybe if I knew more detail, I'd be more receptive -- you assume that, one, I don't think anything should be done, and two (and worse), that I'm not doing anything myself. I work with educational access programs, developing workshops for primary and secondary school kids from disadvantaged schools as a way of getting them to see that while the social barriers to education might make them feel inadequate, they most certainly have something to offer, that they are anything but stupid. The more I run these things, the more I'm asked to do them, and the harder I try to make them a positive experience for the kids. I am also working on getting involved in some projects that will help to build progressive and inclusive community identities without using the 'top down' methods where the privileged and educated march in and tell people how they can better themselves. I AM doing something, and I am very passionate about what I'm doing, but just because I don't want to go throwing red paint all over the streets, you assumed that I'm part of the problem. That's what I meant by alienating people: if people critique the way you do things, then you accuse them of undermining 'the cause' of global justice.

Commendable.

Again, I never ASSUMED anything, I merely pointed out that if I wanted (which I didn't) I could infer from what you are saying that I shouldn't do anything, merely from the tone and content of what you are saying ( which was comprised more so of criticism than any form of plausible alternatives, or at least that is how it appeared ). Also, I never accused anyone of undermining "the cause", whatever that is.

I just think that stopping people randomly on the street and harrassing and humiliating them is not, perhaps, the best way to highlight the problem of people being randomly harrassed and humiliated. These kinds of 'it could just as easily be you' exercises work well in the context of something like an educational workshop, but you can't force people into your protest and expect it to yield the same results.

Thank you for this excellent idea and suggestion, maybe the ppl who are organising these events will see it and take note of it. ( I am being sincere )

Be loud, be overt, be impossible to ignore. Speak up. I wish more people would. But when you want to raise awareness and get people on your side, sometimes you have to make allowances for things, like letting people get their shit in Marks and Spencer. Simply harrassing them, even if, in the context of the harrassment, you present ways in which they can do something about the problem, seems like an unproductive way to go about it. Instead of paying attention to the issue and how it can be dealt with, they'll just be pissed off. That is what I meant by alienating people who don't share your altruism.

Why not try a 'Day of Silence' to highlight the issue of ethnic minorities and disenfranchised people having so little voice? What's usually done is that those involved take a vow of silence for the day, and when someone tries to talk to you, you hand them a card that says, 'I am keeping silent today, to draw attention to the millions of people who are silenced because of [whatever the issue is]' and, on the reverse of the card, you give facts and figures and ways people, as individuals (who may not want to join a 'cause) can do something about it. I'm not saying that this should be the only way, I'm only pointing out an alternative form of raising awareness that might be less intrusive.

Thank you again fo this other excellent suggestion and contribution.

I really don't think there was any tirade. I might have responded with a modicum of vitriol, peppered with sarcasm, but certainly not a tirade. Just because we might have been sarcastic and said 'fuck' and 'shit' doesn't mean we weren't trying to be constructive. If you'd paid attention to the criticisms, you'd have noticed that both Lizzie and I care about the same kinds of problems you do, it's just that neither of us agree with the way you appear to want to go about them.

I may be quoting you, but this also refers to latex lizzie, but refering to ppl as dickheads and the use of stereotypes is not the most conductive way of getting your point across.

As for the parks, okay, I'd be interested in seeing more about them. We are lucky in Dublin that we do have a fair amount of public space in which people can just relax and appreciate the open space. It might not be public in the way that you want it to be, and it's tragic that FNB can't set up in Stephen's Green, but there are other ways that you could work on this issue in conjunction with occupying the land. Since Dúchas no longer exists as a government body, maybe there is room in the new configuration of departments to start looking at the zoning legislation and help to find ways to make this possible. Obviously, the government isn't just going to open its doors to what you want, but I ask you this: do you know the legal implications of this? Do you know the legislation well enough to find loopholes or ways of amending or changing it? I'm all for public displays of dissatisfaction, but it's also important to know how to speak the language of those whom you oppose.

So far, FNB haven't found any loopholes but have found out that the park (millenium park I think) on Dame st. is indeed public and shall hopefully be used as the location for future FNB actions.

And as far as capitalism goes, could you define it so we know what it is you want to overthrow? Where does it begin? Where does it end? How can you just 'overthrow' something that is such an inherent part of the way that people perceive the world around them? It isn't an economic system that exists in isolation, and I don't just mean that it goes hand in hand with political and social injustice. It is part of the way the world has been perceived and social relationships constituted since the 16th century. How can you just 'overthrow' that? I agree that abuses of the system have created glaring and horrific inequalities, and that just because the problems are huge and deeply-entrenched in our worldviews, that we just shouldn't try. No one argued that.

I am fully aware that capitalism is a social relation ( "you can't blow up a social relation" ) as well as an economic system, but I also don't think that an internet discussion forum ( a slightly debased form of communication ) is the ideal medium for discussing capitalism. I found broken arms " anti-capitalism discuss" thread so pointless as to be inane in the extreme. I might as well have started a thread "shopping trolleys - discuss" or any other word let alone ideology that would have been in any way productive. Also, I did have a lot of smilies after that "capitalism" quote, but I should have included an iron, as I was pretty much agreeing with what lizzie was saying, in theory at least.

But just because I'm not a socialist or an anarchist doesn't mean I'm the enemy. Maybe if you spent more time listening to what other people were saying, you'd see that the whole world isn't against you, that people are interested in working towards change, but that we don't all agree with how it should be done.

I'm not an anarchist or socialist, though I would display some affinity with many oftheir beliefs, I would more classify myself as an autonomist and would in fact agree with 85% of what you are saying and my perception of what your opinions are. And don't even get me started on skipping

Isn't pluralism, in politics as well as in society, part of the sense of social justice for which you purport to fight? If not, well, then in this utopian world you seem to want to create, where is the place for those of us who agreed with you in principle but not in method?

What is a rhetorical question? How long is a piece of thread? I'm not involved in the planning of any of these events and hardly believe them to be a method for creating a new world, though believe it necessary to let ppl (even if it is in spectacle form) that there is dissent out there to way that society,culture,etc. is today.

 

[redflaremist]

For people who are all about inclusion they are a pretty exclusive lot,unless you are an "oppressed black lesbian coffee bean farmer" I gotta be a total crusty or I'm not with the "reality" of it all nonsense pisses me off.

I am not really sure who you are applying this to. You should come along to a meeting sometime and see who attends them. The amount of "total crusty" types is smaller than you think (usually zero, they're too busy out smoking hash in west cork!). There's never been any problem with inclusion.

As for a "shamble" of events, there's been months of planning, meetings, leaflet drawing up, talks with other groups, liason with groups from the UK, etc, so all of these events have been thought out and planned.

There is no "dilution" of a message or a solution trying to help the poor, the old, the sick, immigrants etc. It all stems from free market capitalism and works its way downwards through all facets of society, into housing, health, wealth, education.

Each of these direct actions over the course of the weekend attempts to highlight particular injustices in society at present which arrive from capitalism. There are many problems with the world which have distinct issues, and cant be dealt with one big protest, action, or solution - in the same way there isnt a single political ideology "ism" that is "right" (including anarchism).

 

[broken arm]

I found broken arms " anti-capitalism discuss" thread so pointless as to be inane in the extreme. I might as well have started a thread "shopping trolleys - discuss" or any other word let alone ideology that would have been in any way productive

ahem. I started that thread so people could explain what they themselves thought of the TERM and what it means to them. I think its weak and means very little. It was peoples own choice to take the question 'discuss' whichever way they want.

 

[broken arm]

you should have joined in and made it less inane you snotty, pretentious wannabe-revolutionary wanker.


Im a little too busy to comment on this thread now but i will when I get a chance.

 

[Latex lizzie]

As for a "shamble" of events, there's been months of planning, meetings, leaflet drawing up, talks with other groups, liason with groups from the UK, etc, so all of these events have been thought out and planned.

There is no "dilution" of a message or a solution trying to help the poor, the old, the sick, immigrants etc. It all stems from free market capitalism and works its way downwards through all facets of society, into housing, health, wealth, education.

If this is the case after months of planning I lament.Really.I applaud your efforts but you are trying to solve to many problems at once,hightlighting lots of issues is fine,but if that's all you wind up doing what's the point?There are so many injustices in the world would it not be better to have as I already mentioned " a singular plan".Then after affecting change on one issue move on to the next?That is the way big business operates and look at how successful they are?Like look at the range of products companies started with in the beginning..coca cola for example..started with coke.. focused on that one product and after they had grabbed the worlds attention they had the power diversify later.

 

[jane]

I am not really sure who you are applying this to. You should come along to a meeting sometime and see who attends them. The amount of "total crusty" types is smaller than you think (usually zero, they're too busy out smoking hash in west cork!). There's never been any problem with inclusion.

As for a "shamble" of events, there's been months of planning, meetings, leaflet drawing up, talks with other groups, liason with groups from the UK, etc, so all of these events have been thought out and planned.

There is no "dilution" of a message or a solution trying to help the poor, the old, the sick, immigrants etc. It all stems from free market capitalism and works its way downwards through all facets of society, into housing, health, wealth, education.

Each of these direct actions over the course of the weekend attempts to highlight particular injustices in society at present which arrive from capitalism. There are many problems with the world which have distinct issues, and cant be dealt with one big protest, action, or solution - in the same way there isnt a single political ideology "ism" that is "right" (including anarchism).

I don't really like being accused (even by default) of assuming that people who do stuff like this are just 'crusty types'. I'm not just some kind of armchair critic who sits around in my velvet house smoking a gold pipe, laughing about the rebellion of the 'great unwashed.' Just because someone doesn't have maggoty dreadlocks and wears shoes doesn't make their actions more valid.

And while I'm in agreement that public shows of protest are sometimes necessary, the thought of spending months making leaflets and 'liasing' and sitting around eating bourbon creams and sucking on salvaged teabags, all for one day: wouldn't it be better to use your time actually doing things to help these people?

How can something 'stem from free market capitalism'? It isn't like an infection you can remove.

And what is 'free-market capitalism'? I'm serious. I've yet to get a definition of this. I spend all day pondering these questions as they relate to the 16th century, and always find that there is no single 'concept' or system that got the ball rolling, even then, where we pretend to find its origins. How could it be any clearer today?

The ideas and systems that form the intellectual and ideological frameworks of our society are not isolated from each other. I see that you acknowledge this in your statements, but how is that shown in your actions? Your allusion to things starting with capitalism and filtering downwards suggests that you cannot conceive of the fact that it is not sitting there like a gremlin, pissing all over old and sick people. It's so intricately related to the way we all view the world that it's not just something that 'filters'. It is.

What is capitalism? As I will continue to ask: where does it begin? Where does it end? If it is the source of all the world's ills, then, for example, why do you still print leaflets? They are on paper, which is produced by paper mills, which are owned and run by industrial giants. To be fair, if you can't define this, then it seems you are pulling a bit of a Don Quixote.

And as for 'inclusion', neither of us meant that you don't allow the 'rest of us' to take part in your meetings, it's that you're not willing to listen to criticism. You respond with pre-packaged rhetoric that doesn't actually make sense. When I ask what 'free-market capitalism' is, I am not asking for what Marx said, or what the dictionary says, I'm asking you to isolate the problem, to set its parameters (as in: can I not buy loo roll to wipe away my poop? Or is it just Nike and other giants who don't deserve my money?), and to tell me how it is you propose to reconstitute society in a way that is truly just, and that means accommodating those of us who don't want to live on a commune and eat carrion.

 

[Latex lizzie]

What is capitalism? As I will continue to ask: where does it begin? Where does it end? If it is the source of all the world's ills, then, for example, why do you still print leaflets? They are on paper, which is produced by paper mills, which are owned and run by industrial giants. To be fair, if you can't define this, then it seems you are pulling a bit of a Don Quixote

..Z'ACTLY.

also carrion has feelings too you know.

 

[jane]

Sorry, the word I should have used was subjectivism. Ethics is a case of right and wrong(?) not a case of what's personally right and wrong for you and what's right and wrong for me (though even I'm not sure of this as it is something I am still now learning more about and reading up on). I haven't assumed anything, far from it, but I said that it is possible that I or anyone else for that matter could assume or imply from what you have said that I have some form of personal "altruistic ethics" that I shouldn't even let other ppl know about or even act upon those beliefs/ethics, when in fact what you were saying is that I shouldn't be condemning ppl for not living up to those ethics but inform and educate them.

I have never claimed any sort of belief in this mythical "working class" as some sort of sole agent of revolutionary change. However I do understand where you are coming from.


Commendable.

Again, I never ASSUMED anything, I merely pointed out that if I wanted (which I didn't) I could infer from what you are saying that I shouldn't do anything, merely from the tone and content of what you are saying ( which was comprised more so of criticism than any form of plausible alternatives, or at least that is how it appeared ). Also, I never accused anyone of undermining "the cause", whatever that is.


Thank you for this excellent idea and suggestion, maybe the ppl who are organising these events will see it and take note of it. ( I am being sincere )



Thank you again fo this other excellent suggestion and contribution.


I may be quoting you, but this also refers to latex lizzie, but refering to ppl as dickheads and the use of stereotypes is not the most conductive way of getting your point across.

So far, FNB haven't found any loopholes but have found out that the park (millenium park I think) on Dame st. is indeed public and shall hopefully be used as the location for future FNB actions.

I am fully aware that capitalism is a social relation ( "you can't blow up a social relation" ) as well as an economic system, but I also don't think that an internet discussion forum ( a slightly debased form of communication ) is the ideal medium for discussing capitalism. I found broken arms " anti-capitalism discuss" thread so pointless as to be inane in the extreme. I might as well have started a thread "shopping trolleys - discuss" or any other word let alone ideology that would have been in any way productive. Also, I did have a lot of smilies after that "capitalism" quote, but I should have included an iron, as I was pretty much agreeing with what lizzie was saying, in theory at least.

I'm not an anarchist or socialist, though I would display some affinity with many oftheir beliefs, I would more classify myself as an autonomist and would in fact agree with 85% of what you are saying and my perception of what your opinions are. And don't even get me started on skipping


What is a rhetorical question? How long is a piece of thread? I'm not involved in the planning of any of these events and hardly believe them to be a method for creating a new world, though believe it necessary to let ppl (even if it is in spectacle form) that there is dissent out there to way that society,culture,etc. is today.

Why do you keep trying to point out what someone might infer from what I write that is actually the opposite of what I -- quite clearly -- said? Why are you pretending I wrote something that I didn't and that I didn't write something I did. The 'tone and content' of what I said were very clear: I SAID that more people should speak up about things that are wrong. The only way you could misread that is if you pretended you didn't see it, which would amount to not actually reading it.

It's obvious that you keep playing this 'someone could infer' game because I don't agree with you, and I make sense, so you have to pretend that what I'm saying is somehow potentially dangerous. Clever (by which I mean 'not clever'). It just sounds moronic and you should stop doing it if you want to be taken seriously. I could just as easily say that what you write is pretty shitty if someone were to read it as a poem. That's retarded (sorry, 'tards).


And thank you SO much for 'commending' me on what I do. I wasn't looking for your approval, thank you. I was merely pointing out that some of us are busy actually doing things in our daily lives that are positive and beneficial, and we don't have time to go running around town, passing out badly-punctuated leaflets.

Why was the anti-capitalism thread inane? Do you feel that it is your domain alone to discuss? And why, then, didn't you contribute? the first thing I asked was for someone to define capitalism: show me what the monster looks like and what can be used to kill it, and I might understand better what 'anti-capitalism' actually means. Doesn't mean I will agree, but it might help if those of us who are interested in learning more about what you're doing were actually acknowledged. No one responded. Instead, you jsut sat there and said it was 'inane'. That's productive.

No one is trying to stifle dissent. It is crucial to have it, but I just want to know what you're dissenting against. It's not an easy question to answer, but you should at least be able to attempt it without resorting to slogans. I don't mean to sound patronising (yes, yes, I do), but I was out protesting in the street before you were old enough to piss, honey, and I know all about this shit. Instead of listening to the experience -- and sometimes, even the cynicism -- of someone with more than 15 years of political activism under her belt, you just went around saying, 'Do you know how someone MIGHT read that!?'

I'm not sure what an 'autonomist' is. Is it like an onanist?

 

[jane]

What is capitalism? As I will continue to ask: where does it begin? Where does it end? If it is the source of all the world's ills, then, for example, why do you still print leaflets? They are on paper, which is produced by paper mills, which are owned and run by industrial giants. To be fair, if you can't define this, then it seems you are pulling a bit of a Don Quixote

..Z'ACTLY.

also carrion has feelings too you know.

Oh, and shorty, what do you mean by 'subjectivism'? Can you give me an example of something that is objective? Before you do, I suggest you don't.

And Lizzie, I realised we can't have carrion. It's meat. And carrion birds deserve it more than we do -- without it, what will they eat?

So we can't have meat (I am beginning to question my vegetarianism anyway, having begun craving steak), and I can't have me bananas because they come from countries with oppressive regimes who are funded by corporate giants. I guess all we're left with is our own faeces. And it won't even have peanuts and sweetcorn in it, 'cos we can't have those, either. No fun.

Plus , it has become clear that all that is good will be disallowed from this new and free society:

*swearing
*sarcasm
*booze (yes, even Buckfast)
*flowers
*sunshine
*fun
*enjoyment of any kind (unless you enjoy eating your own shit and talking about...um....what would we talk about?)
*dissent
*money, sweet, sweet money
*lip gloss

Fucking hell, that's no world I wanna live in.

By the way, there'd be no music, art, or bunnyrabbits*, either.


*Bunny rabbits are native to neither England nor Ireland, and rabbit warrens first appear in the private pleasure gardens of lordly estates. These 'foreign' animals running around the landscape represented access to exotic goods, and especially exerted lordly power when they would munch away on the crops of tenant farmers -- the bunny rabbit is a proto-capitalist symbol and is OUT OF HERE when the shit goes down.

 

[Latex lizzie]

..you are confusing two different threads my dear, anyway you can have whatever you want in your own world..steak and all! simply because its your world.You can have people wearing beef clothing if you like.MMMMM..beef.

 

[jane]

..you are confusing two different threads my dear, anyway you can have whatever you want in your own world..steak and all! simply because its your world.You can have people wearing beef clothing if you like.MMMMM..beef.

....mumble....grumble....chuckle....something about 'beef curtains'.....heh.....shame

Hooray!

Bunnies made of beef?

 

[Latex lizzie]

..you've just given me an Idea.

 

[jane]

..you've just given me an Idea.

Please let it be beef bunnies....please let it be beef bunnies. I'm allergic to real bunnies, but beef has never once made me sneeze or given me watery eyes. It has also never had diarrhea on the carpet like the prick bunny I had when I was a kid.


'Hi, I'm an artist. Would you like to see my beef sculpture?'

 

[Latex lizzie]

"prick bunny"




funniest two words ever uttered round these parts.I'm gonna get fired.