If you talk to anarchists about protests, they might talk about direct action. By that they mean doing things in a group that directly affect the thing being protested. Some of these tactics include blockading roads either with human bodies or debris, boycotts, and even property destruction.
I was around some direct action at the RNC protest.
I think some things that those radicals do are counterproductive, like destroying property. But being near that kind of thought and action really made an impression on me. The contrast between american culture and the culture of direct action and direct democracy astounds me.
It seems like everything that we do as american citizens is indirect.
For example, our democracy is indirect. Instead of voting for what we want, we vote for some abstract representation of an ideology that is usually a lie in the form of a candidate or bill.
We also learn indirectly. Instead of doing real learning in school, we do indirect learning. That is to say instead of learning how to do things like write, read, and do math and science, we learn how to do thematic schoolwork.
I had more examples of this, but I just forgot them. Darn. Anyway, the point is, I would say that we have an entire indirect culture.
Of course, what I am getting at is that I don't like that. I think that a good way to live for the benefit of society is to take direct action against indirect culture. By that I mean teach and learn directly in or outside of school, practice direct democracy in and outside of mainstream politics, etc.
And with that, an image:
Thursday, September 4, 2008
direct action in a broader context
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
12 comments:
"practice direct democracy in and outside of mainstream politics"
Check out the second post down by 'Anthony Pierce, Lynchburg, VA' on this page:
http://whosedemocracy.publicradio.org/activities/discuss/responses/
Sums it up pretty nicely.
Plus, as you said in your previous post "our culture is so backwards that drivel like the oriely factor is generally accepted".
Another great argument against democracy.
I'm sure you saw Ron Paul supporters at the protest. The libertarian message of reducing government and increasing personal responsibility really appeals to me.
A few years back I asked, "If democracy is a good way to run a country, why isn't it a good way to run a company?"
Now I believe it was a question built upon a false assumption.
Agreed, and to make matters worse, it's a society which forces us to live in our mind.
And we know that the mind is full of lies and uncertainties.
In my experience the only way to see clearly and live directly is by practicing Kriya Yoga.
L
Oh to be a misguided youth full of ideas and empty of wisdom. The world was so much simpler when physical maturity outpaced brain development.
There is no difference between Fox and CNN, Katie Couric, MSNBC or the New York Times. There is no journalism any longer, simply propaganda. Say, "FUCK THE MEDIA", not fuck Fox News. Then go watch Cspan and actually learn what's going on, rather than have someone else tell you what you should think.
I'll give you a nice little example, that might be somewhat upsetting considering your likely liberal slant.
The Obama campaign is running on an amorphous and ethereal slogan of 'change.' Says, 'hey look at the economy! It's Bush's fault!'
Well that's awfully curious, as the Democrats took control of the congress two years ago promising change. Now we all know the congress controls the pursestrings. The president doesn't have much control over the economy. So why is it right after the democrats take control, the economy starts going downhill? But it's not their fault, no, nope, can't be, nope, nuh uh. Something to chew on.
Top Recipients of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Campaign Contributions, 1989-2008
Name Office Party/State Total
1. Dodd, Christopher J S D-CT $133,900
2. Kerry, John S D-MA $111,000
3. Obama, Barack S D-IL $105,849
4. Clinton, Hillary S D-NY $75,550
5. Kanjorski, Paul E H D-PA $65,500
Note something curiously familiar about that list? But the republicans are evil, not for the working man like the democrats. I swear, I read it in the paper and saw it on tv!
Hey man its the mob mentality that started that chant, not me :) At one point it changed to "FUCK FOX NEWS, AND CNN TOO!".
And I don't like democrats either! The protest was an _anrachist/anti authoritarian_ protest, not a liberal protest. The people carrying Obama signs were booed savagely. I would have gone to the DNC protest as well, but I had contacts near the RNC one.
I'd like to point out I don't have a tv. (And I doubt CSPAN shows "whats really going on" anyway.)
My point in these political posts is not to endorse a candidate or party, I just wanted to document the protest and show my support for the values of anarchists and the anti-institutionalists.
That's fine then, forest. However, I think you better pray that the institutions don't fail and mob rule anarchy actually takes over.
I much rather see the people stop being sheep, wake up and actually wrest their republic back from the two party system. For all the flack the media gives Sarah Palin, if we had a congress full of 'hockey moms', computer programmers and farmers then we would be far better off than the professional politicians we keep voting for.
And as far as Cspan goes, you can doubt it all you want. As you don't own a TV (a move I applaud) you can rightfully claim ignorance. But it's the government in action, right on TV, without any talking heads interpreting it for you.
The actually floor of the congress and senate aren't that interesting, as they are most prepared speeches and talking points. The real interesting things happen in the committee chambers.
The point of anarchy is not to kill government and "let the mob take over", but instead to change your society so that it does not need government. That means a lot of tolerance, a lot of solidarity, and a lot of nonviolence. I feel strongly that these things are what america needs right now. (Even though I admit real anarchy will never happen on a large scale.)
As far as professional politicians versus hocky moms-- I think they are both equally malleable in the hands of the affluent.
Heres something for you to think about....
"There's going to be an event...And out of this event we're gonna invade Afganistan to run a pipeline through the caspian sea...We're gonna invade iraq, you know to take over the oil fields and establish a base in the middle east, and were going to go after chavez in Venezuela. Your going to see soldiers looking in these places like Afganistan and Pakistan, looking for guys in caves that thier never going to find, there's going to be this war on terror, in which there is no real enemy."
Nick Rockefeller, October 2000
Yeah well Forest that's a common perspective of kids between 19-23 or so. It's really just a function of brain development. It's the last state of the 'rebellious' age that started in the early teens. By the time you are 30 you will look back and say to yourself, 'What the fuck was I thinking?' Similar to how you might currently view a 13 year old's thought processes. It seemed logical at the time!
We're social beings and naturally gravitate towards a social structure and hierarchy. We're literally wired to do so. Get rid of the government institutions (which just like corporations are really just groups of individuals with their own social structure) and you think you're going to still have electricity? Running water? Who's going to fill in that pot hole next spring? Get rid of money and go back to the barter system? I think not.
A constitutional republic is the best system we've come up with so far. Problem is it relies on an informed citizen, when most of the ones we have these days are too busy watching family guy and friends to pay attention. So instead they get their 'information' one bite at a time. Whether it's off some internet blog or the evening news. Swallow quickly, no time to digest!
As far as Nick Rockefeller, I love conspiracy nuts. Especially ones like him who also say the elite wants to implant microchips in everyone to control their actions.
It wouldn't be too hard to predict 9-11, if you were paying attention in the early 90's. After all Forest, 9-11 wasn't the first time the world trade center was attacked. Follow the increasing tide of attacks on American interests starting in the 90's and 9-11 is just icing on the cake.
In hindsight though, it probably wouldn't have happened if Clinton and Jamie Gorelick hand't gutted the CIA's human intelligence program, relying on technology instead.
I don't want to talk about political details.
Actually that guy I qouted is a member of a family that runs the largest central bank in the world, not a conspiracy nut...
And personally I don't think our society is all that great. When was the last time you had an adventure? Do you really have that you have meaningful of relationships with most of the people around you? Our culture has such a depressing and separating effect on us, thats what I don't like.
Actually you didn't quote Nick Rockefeller. It's not a direct quote. It came out of an interview with Aaron Russo a year or two back. Be careful with quoting people who didn't quite say what you're quoting.
Aaron Russo He claimed all sorts of things in the interview, including as I alluded to that the secret powers behind the scenes want to implant a computer chip in everyone to control their actions. The interview is available on youtube somewhere. Just search around for it.
I used to have lots of adventures around your age, not so much anymore. Too busy trying to make ends meet.
As far as meaningful relationships with people, I don't like people all that much so it's not big on my list! But the government isn't stopping you from going next door and chatting it up with your neighbor. Getting rid of it won't solve your relationship issues, as they're not the cause of them.
Yeah I know, that qoute is secondhand: mr. rockefeller -> aaron russo -> me, but I don't think that makes it any less relevant....
Well if you don't like people, hmm, I'm sorry to hear it :(
Relevant and true are two totally different things, Forest, but they are related. Unless you have the guy who's mouth he's putting words into on record or video agreeing with the statement then you can't quite call it true.
It follows then, if it's not true is it therefore still relevant?
I guess you think aaron russo is crazy because he says "rfid" and because he says "conspiracy". And generally we don't trust what crazy people say. But I don't think the guy is crazy (even though I may not fully agree with him), and, in the context of the interview, I believe the original firsthand source is probably not that different than the secondhand repetition of it.
I'm mad at myself for pasting that in, but whatever, lets lay this rotting tomato of a debate to rest.
I'll see you in the street... or maybe you'll be too busy watching tv :)
Post a Comment