Don't Go?! Get Real.

The Mifflin Street Block Party has become a right of passage for many students at the University of Wisconsin in Madison. Think what you may of it, it's a persistent event and has proceeded annually on the first Saturday in May since the 1960's. Although attempts have been made by the city and business interests to co-opt it, it will continue to take place with or without sanction.

The party had its origins in the sixties as an anti-war protest against the school's complicity with the military-industrial complex -- particularly in regard to the Dow Chemical corporation which was recruiting students to make napalm and agent orange. Additionally, the event became a dance party in the streets to show solidarity with the rebellion in France in '68. Police responded violently to the party, as is their wont, and the students fought back. This is undoubtedly part of the reason why Madison earned the reputation as being the "Berkeley of the midwest." 

As the party continued to manifest annually, thanks to the rebellious spirit of youthful students, it continued to have political messages tied with it. For example, in 1984, a commemorative t-shirt design was opposed to U.S. involvement with Nicaragua. And, of course, this was fitting for an event such as this one in a progressive city such as Madison. 

However, over the years, the authorities have attempted to co-opt the party. The city has given tenuous approval (of an event it couldn't stop) and businesses have been allowed to set up stages and push corporate booze. It might even be argued that the city and the university has encouraged drunkenness and apolitical revelry at this event. This is effectively what has happened (by design or not).

What A Nightmare!

An Open Letter To Derrick Jensen

Dear DJ,

I hope you don't mind me addressing you by your initials because that has simply become a habit of mine over the years as I've spammed links to your articles and videos all over the internet. Indeed, you have often given voice to certain issues in a way that is very much appreciated. For that, I must thank you.

However... I am inclined to write this letter, and make it public, because I don't feel you adequately address criticism from those of us who share many of your concerns and much of your perspective. I can understand this lack of a response in psychological terms because no one likes to be criticized. Nevertheless, I feel that honestly acknowledging such criticism could be beneficial to expanding the discussion about the issues and ideas you champion. As I don't have much faith in getting a response from you on any public forums, and because my time during any Q & A period would undoubtedly be limited, I've chosen to present my criticism and questions thusly.

Racist Murderers In The United States Of America

The tragedy of Trayvon Martin cannot be understated.  An innocent young man was shot down for, apparently, little reason other than the color of his skin.  This was a terrible sort of event which continues to be repeated in the United States and in other parts of the world.  Race-based violence is, unquestionably, one of the most odious aspects of daily life in many places.  If society is to truly advance in any meaningful way... this is something which must be adequately addressed. 

But there is something about this specific case which strikes me as peculiar.  I find it interesting that the highest elected government officials have joined the chorus in calling for justice regarding this incident.  Of all potential cases to capture the imagination, I find this one to be relatively arbitrary in its uniqueness.  Young men of color are being shot down every day in modern America and, as horribly tragic and unfortunate as this particular instance was, it just personally doesn't shock me any more than many other cases.  What is it about this case that's captured the attention of the media and government officials?

Trust and Relationships

Our willingness to express our hopes and fears is matched by the proportional likelihood that we will be manipulated and exploited accordingly.  This isn't to say specifically how often the latter will happen when we open up, but people are undoubtedly manipulated along these lines by those they've trusted.  The breakdown of the family in modern America suggests a limitation of unconditional love and almost everyone has witnessed basic betrayals of trust.  Many of us have, consequently, become more guarded when establishing relationships.  Our subsequent lack of openness further impedes our ability to form various forms of relationships and this, in turn, creates a negative feedback loop based upon the fact that we know information is being withheld from us -- which causes us to be more suspicious of others and, therefore, emotionally guarded and distant.  
Politically, when the realities of surveillance and opportunistic maliciousness are added, issues of trust and healthy relationships are complicated further.  We have a difficult time simply establishing basic personal relationships, but establishing trusted political alliances can be far more daunting.  It's possible to get lucky in terms of love or affinity groups, but it would be better if luck were less of a necessary factor in these regards.

The Folly of Christopher Hedges

Often, when describing the inevitable scenes of major protests in the United States, I evoke the image of a person who has lost a brother in Iraq, a person who has also lost a sister to the trumped up drug war, whose father had his job outsourced, whose mother had her pension gambled away by speculators, whose grandmother lost her home of 50 years because she missed a mortgage payment, and whose grandfather died of industrial poisoning and couldn't afford health care. And make no mistake... variants of such individuals readily exist. So when such a person understandably shows up to protest the corporate oligarchy at a G8 meeting (or the national conventions of the corporate parties), they aren't there to sing kumbaya, march along a permitted path, or have their head cracked by the brutal police. And if they get so angry that they throw a brick through a bank window... I will be the last person to condemn them.

I'm not giving the condescending approval of a social worker who understands some flawed psychology behind such actions... I'm suggesting that such rowdiness is perfectly human, rational, and even inspiring. I'm not suggesting that any particular individual at any particular event engage in such actions, but I fully understand some of the motivation behind such actions and wouldn't condemn an individual engaging in them. And I don't feel that condemnation or further punishment of such individuals is beneficial to society. On the contrary, such individuals may likely prove to be on the cutting edge of actual change in this country.

Enter Chris Hedges and the privileged leftist elite trying to pacify and reign in the righteous indignation of many abused Americans. As in his latest article, they primarily prescribe as a method for social change... accepting more punishment and self-sacrifice. But that's easier to suggest for some than others. And why must they so often be quick to condemn those who aren't willing to take anymore punishment? I'd suggest this reflects a shallow understanding of the true pain already administered to so many people and the sacrifices they've already made.

The Politics of Internet Censorship: A Technological Critique

First of all, I just want to point out that the recent protests and other actions in relation to the issue of SOPA/PIPA (bolstered by varying degrees of blackouts on websites like Reddit, Wikipedia, and Google) quite likely amounted to the most politically active day in the history of the world -- in terms of people discussing legislation, issues of free speech, and governmental corruption. Furthermore, we are quite likely to see evermore people championing the cause of free speech (and challenging legal restrictions upon it through loopholes like copyright and trademark). These are very hopeful developments.

However, what I find particularly noteworthy is the kind of information that the government is looking to restrict... namely, access to art. On it's face, there are specious arguments about protecting artists and the profits of the movie and recording industry. These arguments have already been thoroughly dismantled by others -- in terms of artists thriving because of their works being spread and because artists created and thrived before any copyright laws existed. But the underlying issue isn't really about protecting artists -- or even corporatized industries profiting off of them. Rather, I feel, the issue is about the plain censorship of political dissent.

There is a difference between a declaration of martial law and a draconian crackdown...

I would like to challenge everyone to examine more closely what martial law actually is, and then... consider what has effectively been declared with the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012 -- especially when taken together with previous legislation like the Patriot Act.  I won't condescend to explain here what the NDAA or the Patriot Act is (follow the links), but I'd really like people to take a moment for consideration about the implications of this growing body of overtly authoritarian, and even totalitarian, legislation.  While most cities and towns don't have tanks rolling through their streets every day, and while curfews are rare, I'd suggest that there are more subtle factors to martial law than these things.  Additionally, while a widespread crackdown and purge of assorted "radicals" hasn't occurred yet, I'd like to point out that the legislation in question allows, and paves the way, for precisely that.  This legislation is, effectively, a declaration of Martial law by the U.S. government.  While arguably few people have been subjected to the worst effects of this legislation, the declaration has been made and many people are, basically and technically, existing in violation of current U.S. law.  If you are living within the borders of the United States of America, you are living under martial law at this very moment. 

Finally, while I don't want to argue too much about definitions... the U.S. has more prisoners per capita (and in total numbers) than any other nation on Earth.  Wiretapping and other broad surveillance measures have been codified by the state.  American citizens can now be arrested by the military, detained, and imprisoned indefinitely without the right to a trial.  All of this amounts to the very definition of a totalitarian police state.

Important Dates in 2012 for Anarchists, The 99% & Social Justice Advocates

After the rise of the #OCCUPYWALLSTREET movement, on top of various revolutions and insurrections around the world in 2011, I expect that 2012 will likely see more of the same along these lines.  Of course, this will also be in the context of more draconian policies which target dissent amidst a crumbling economic and environmental infrastructure.  Some people will, undoubtedly, try to preserve and maintain the status quo while blaming the victims for resisting (or for even just simply pointing out the injustices of this world).  Nevertheless, I've got a feeling that this coming year might possibly see unprecedented protests around the globe.  As late as the proverbial hour is getting for the dominant culture... people may simply never have this type of opportunity to protest again.  That may sound like an exaggeration, but I wouldn't underestimate the power and ruthlessness of those currently in charge of this system.  Who can guess the horrific depths to which they will sink to maintain their power?     

That said, despite the risks, I reiterate my hunch that 2012 will be a year of significant and unprecedented protests.  Particularly, in English speaking countries, a few specific events might attract large numbers of people demonstrating in favor of social, economic, and environmental justice.  Again... these will simply be building off of recent actions and will be driven by an evermore desperate and diverse cross-section of society (with less to lose each passing day).  The simple reality is that environmental degradation continues to snowball while resource depletion spurs war, famine, and economic instability.      

So, without further ado, these are the particular events which I predict will see large protests in the face of violent and corrupt power...

Crises Can Be Openings: Defeating our enduring fatalism.

This article was written by Sasha Lilley.  She’s the author of Capital and Its Discontents from which this piece was taken.   http://www.adbusters.org/magazine/99/crises-can-be-openings.html

The past several years have witnessed the spectacular unraveling of capitalism, or so it has appeared.

 

Venerated investment banks have vanished overnight, titans of industry have permanently shuttered their doors, and rich nations have lurched perilously close to default. The ideology of the free market, once seemingly unassailable, lies in tatters. While the death knell of capitalism may not yet be tolling, the crisis is undoubtedly of a different order of magnitude than anything seen in decades.

Dear Occupiers: A Letter from Anarchists

The following text appeared at CrimethInc.Com and is being reposted here and elsewhere. 

 

Dear Occupiers: A letter from anarchists

Support and solidarity! We’re inspired by the occupations on Wall Street and elsewhere around the country. Finally, people are taking to the streets again! The momentum around these actions has the potential to reinvigorate protest and resistance in this country. We hope these occupations will increase both in numbers and in substance, and we’ll do our best to contribute to that.

Why should you listen to us? In short, because we’ve been at this a long time already. We’ve spent decades struggling against capitalism, organizing occupations, and making decisions by consensus. If this new movement doesn’t learn from the mistakes of previous ones, we run the risk of repeating them. We’ve summarized some of our hard-won lessons here.