silo
Active Member
- Joined
- May 1, 2001
- Messages
- 1,890
Em, there's over a hundred replies on the original 'PPP' thread, I thought I might be all authoritarian and fascist and try to get everyone to continue on a more manageable thread. Any complaints? Talk to the Garda Complaints Office. 
I had not actually read the 'PPP' thread in a few days because of the size of it and because I don't spend my life on the internet, so having just read through the whole thing I found it very interesting, not least because of how it relates to the other activities of my weekend, of which, more soon.
Ok. The thread had various things going on.
Theory stuff:
There was a theoretical discussion about the Anti-capitalist movement. My contribution, for what it's worth, is this. Capitalism (or, more accurately, corporatism; what we call capitalism would have Adam Smith spinning in his grave) relies on consuming other things and selling them back to you as an non-threatening version of themselves at three times the price, whether this is anti-capitalism, books, soap, art, music. Capitalism commodifies. Duh.
So there's no point in agonising over how and in what way 'the system' will commodify anti-capitalism (the act of labelling is itself already a putative commodity - but that's a whole other ball game), because it's inevitable that it'll happen.
The only solution is to keep going (or give up and be cynical - without hope you guarantee that there will be no hope, and all that). From a basis of assuming that your acts will one day be a commodity - if 'the system' continues as it is - you have no choice but to continue, and to do so more creatively, more skilfully, more subtly, more ingeniously, in order to remain one step ahead of what you want to destroy. Who, in the 1930's, or the middle of world war 2, would have predicted the Situationiste Internationale which followed in the 50's? Who in the 80's would have forseen Reclaim the Streets, Ya Basta, Wombles, etc? Capitalism, if it does nothing else, exercises the brains of those against it to be creative.
(As far as I can see, this sort of approach, taken to an obvious conclusion, leads to the sort of existentialist ideas like 'you are condemned to be free' and all that jazz. Shiggity Shiggity Shwah.)
Added to all this is the far more practical suggestion that Stephen was making about sustainable communities...
Chomsky stuff:
As far as I know, the boy Noam has quite deliberately never given an in-depth account of what he expects an anarchist society to look like, partly due to the fact that it would be a fluid and protean entity - if he has, as was implied by posts about him describing rubbish disposal after the revolution (?), I'd very much like to read it - can someone post a URL?
Burlington Hotel stuff:
Well, I wasn't there so I can't say anything (apart from the fact that Clodagh was in one of the pictures from the protest on UK Indymedia). However, it relates to what else i was going to say, specifically...
Embassy Protests stuff:
...which wasn't on the other thread but is relevant.
I was at these protests and saw the police actions which were pointless inflammatory and quite possibly unconstitutional (not that lots of other things aren't also and also get ignored, but anyway...). If anyone else was there and wants to give an account: [email protected] .
So, to set the conspiracy ball rolling; do the events at the Burlington and Embassies represent a deliberate attempt to split any incipient anti-war movement into 'moderates' and 'extremists', or are they coincidences?
I had not actually read the 'PPP' thread in a few days because of the size of it and because I don't spend my life on the internet, so having just read through the whole thing I found it very interesting, not least because of how it relates to the other activities of my weekend, of which, more soon.
Ok. The thread had various things going on.
Theory stuff:
There was a theoretical discussion about the Anti-capitalist movement. My contribution, for what it's worth, is this. Capitalism (or, more accurately, corporatism; what we call capitalism would have Adam Smith spinning in his grave) relies on consuming other things and selling them back to you as an non-threatening version of themselves at three times the price, whether this is anti-capitalism, books, soap, art, music. Capitalism commodifies. Duh.
So there's no point in agonising over how and in what way 'the system' will commodify anti-capitalism (the act of labelling is itself already a putative commodity - but that's a whole other ball game), because it's inevitable that it'll happen.
The only solution is to keep going (or give up and be cynical - without hope you guarantee that there will be no hope, and all that). From a basis of assuming that your acts will one day be a commodity - if 'the system' continues as it is - you have no choice but to continue, and to do so more creatively, more skilfully, more subtly, more ingeniously, in order to remain one step ahead of what you want to destroy. Who, in the 1930's, or the middle of world war 2, would have predicted the Situationiste Internationale which followed in the 50's? Who in the 80's would have forseen Reclaim the Streets, Ya Basta, Wombles, etc? Capitalism, if it does nothing else, exercises the brains of those against it to be creative.
(As far as I can see, this sort of approach, taken to an obvious conclusion, leads to the sort of existentialist ideas like 'you are condemned to be free' and all that jazz. Shiggity Shiggity Shwah.)
Added to all this is the far more practical suggestion that Stephen was making about sustainable communities...
Chomsky stuff:
As far as I know, the boy Noam has quite deliberately never given an in-depth account of what he expects an anarchist society to look like, partly due to the fact that it would be a fluid and protean entity - if he has, as was implied by posts about him describing rubbish disposal after the revolution (?), I'd very much like to read it - can someone post a URL?
Burlington Hotel stuff:
Well, I wasn't there so I can't say anything (apart from the fact that Clodagh was in one of the pictures from the protest on UK Indymedia). However, it relates to what else i was going to say, specifically...
Embassy Protests stuff:
...which wasn't on the other thread but is relevant.
I was at these protests and saw the police actions which were pointless inflammatory and quite possibly unconstitutional (not that lots of other things aren't also and also get ignored, but anyway...). If anyone else was there and wants to give an account: [email protected] .
So, to set the conspiracy ball rolling; do the events at the Burlington and Embassies represent a deliberate attempt to split any incipient anti-war movement into 'moderates' and 'extremists', or are they coincidences?
