Living In The Revolution?

[IBRRHOBO]

Widerstand and others,
First, i agree that if the "societal engine" just collapsed this very moment alot of people would be fucked. However, this is not relevent to my understanding of a revolution. When and if capitalism falls to a revolution i would hape that we would have a large enough movement to reasemble society from the bottom up. The workers would take control of the industries, eliminating the heirarchy of the workforce, people would start gardening and farms and food production would continue simply under the control of the workers (as was demonstrated in barcelona in 1936 where they overthrew there employers and took control of the city). I dont know why people think that after a revolution shit would just stop and turn to hell. Yes things will be tough for a while, how tough depending on numerous circumstances. My point is that a revolution would not stop all technological advances and food production etc., it would simply put the control in the hand of the people (in an anarchist revolution that is).

there are a couple of nations that come to mind, somalia being the first. here you've had revolution after revolution. now there has been NO AID of any kind so it would resemble a pietre dish for this proposition. south africa, though not by violence, is another example. the goals of revolution are to topple those in power. south africa found out the hard way that when you kill/remove all those in power and put your own in, you pay a price. see the whole concept that tomorrow we wave the black flag over the white house is flawed. locally? possible. human nature is human nature. who's gonna give the marching orders? kill him, spare her, you work , you play? once that person comes into power the dynamic is refocused on that which it replaced.

the other flaw at a national level is who exactly are the people. let's not bullshit around, there aren't a fuck of a lot of crusty punks out there on the rails with PhD's and believe it or not you NEED those people with PhD's for a nation to function. won't hit the points as they've been debated before. local, possible. national, never.

good counterpoints there veggieguy!

bote: LOVED the link! THANKS!

 

[finn]

I'm not really political either, and my involvement in protests only go as far as medical and sometimes legal support- not a huge fan of yelling or chanting or throwing a fit. The way I see it, the way all the structures supporting society are set up, it will collapse too easily and put everyone into a bind with any drastic change. It's not like there's a highly adaptable net of small farms and businesses that people can depend on- instead it's mostly huge corporations competing with each other and pushing small business off the map. If there is some revolution, I'd like to see one where it's about replacing all the chains with something a bit more human.

 

[theshadwdragn]

there are a couple of nations that come to mind, somalia being the first. here you've had revolution after revolution. now there has been NO AID of any kind so it would resemble a pietre dish for this proposition. south africa, though not by violence, is another example. the goals of revolution are to topple those in power. south africa found out the hard way that when you kill/remove all those in power and put your own in, you pay a price. see the whole concept that tomorrow we wave the black flag over the white house is flawed. locally? possible. human nature is human nature. who's gonna give the marching orders? kill him, spare her, you work , you play? once that person comes into power the dynamic is refocused on that which it replaced.

the other flaw at a national level is who exactly are the people. let's not bullshit around, there aren't a fuck of a lot of crusty punks out there on the rails with PhD's and believe it or not you NEED those people with PhD's for a nation to function. won't hit the points as they've been debated before. local, possible. national, never.

You make many good points.

Fiirst, here have been many failed revolutions in the past, very many. However simply because they failed doesnt mean that a revolution based on anarchist principles with contemorary tactics nessesarily would. When looking at the tactics, methods, and priciples present in these failed revolutions we can see why we failed. And from this we can and have developed a new revolutionary praxis based on autonomy, subversion and most importantly community organizing. Not sure if you know to much about whats going on in Greece, or europe for that matter, but you could check out infoshop.org (its Europe section) to find out. In short, they are building the foundations for and initiating this revolution. Insurrectionary anarchism is the largest revolutionary movement today, however it is not easy to see in the USA because its not as big...yet.

Second, you mention "who will give the marching orders"? Do you realy believe that humans, in there nature, require someone telling them what to do? As has been seen most obviously in the Spanish Civil War when anarchists and others took over Barcelona and ran the entire workforce with no bosses. It is called federalism, and if you look it up, check out proudhons definition.

Third, your best point is the last, where will we get people with expertise in medicine or any other of the skill sets that require massive education. Well first, the anarchist revolution (if it happens) would have some of these people on there side already, so the period durring the revolution and for some time after, as sketchy and tough as it may be, will have some of these people. But lets say after the revolution has happened and the area is reorganized communally and egalitarianly. First, take a look at cuba. This is far from a successful revolution (though it came close), yet there is much to be learned. They have numerous free medical universities up and running throughout, and there education systems are top of the line. So why couldnt any one else do the same?

Finally, remember that revolution is simply a word. The real thing is a long, difficult, and unsure process. It encompasses massive peoples movements, insurrectionary militancy, community organizing and solidarity, etc. etc. etc. This being said, the best we can do is try and shoot for the best, for i refuse to sit in apathy and resignation in this world using the excuse of "its to risky" or "it wont work".

 

[oldmanLee]

while the posts here have been both informative and well thought out,I must admit that they seem rather like masturbation.Whatever you belive,do something about it,don't talk.

 

[IBRRHOBO]

theshadowdragon: at least you've given some thought there to your presentation. that, in and of itself, impresses me. i'd probably take point w/the cuba issue on the fact it was the US who backed castro initially and then USSR down the road, so that wasn't a 'real' revolution. merely an imposition of change of leadership by superpowers.

see, what i take issue w/is NOT that revolution IS/IS NOT possible, but that an ANARCHISTIC revolution is possible. anarchism, by ideological definition is antiauthoritarian. there is the problem. didn't say it WASN'T possible, just very doubtful in the 21st Century.

oldmanLee: it appears you feel folks oughta shut the fuck up and act. kinda sad as obviously since this WHOLE forum is about dialogue.

 

[wartomods]

I hate to say this, but i am pretty content with the state of society here.

 

[hassysmacker]

Oh, I agree with Widerstand, that few (self included) could do it - but I think that's good. Even fewer will willingly do it.
Nations are not tribes. Tribes are, my best guess, maxed-out around something like 3,000 people.

I've even read studies by a guy named dunbar, about something called dunbars number, which extrapolated from studies about primates, proposes that over 150 people human interaction starts to socially stratify, and turn to hierarchy.


And IBRR: Somalia is a terrible example because that was just a society that collapsed but still has a highly capitalist-in-nature functioning. SO its FUUUUCKED up. Thats what I think all "anarcho-capitalist" situations will collapse into.

And about the local: yes, largescale: no thing, fucking fantastic. I I know that society will forcefully decentralize in the near future- (50-100 years maybe) due to issues such as peak oil, peak everything else, and ecocide, and I also know that local communities are inherently more sustainable than cities, and I also know that the planet is severely overpopulated. The scientific ranges given about the Earths carrying capacity for humans has typically been in the range of 100 million-1 billion.

Just sayin'.

 

[IBRRHOBO]

can u site a GOOD example of an anarchist revolution which is STILL functioning as an anarchist government today? that way we just cut through all my bad examples and get to the guts of the matter. i don't think you can and we've had the ideology for hundreds of years.

 

[bote]

I also see an irreconciliable difference between anarchism and hierarchy, but I do believe in the possibility of successful anarchist living situations, having had the pleasure of living in a couple.
I've lived in travel/punk houses with alternating casts averaging 20-30 people and amazingly, the fridges were more or less always full, the dishes got done more promptly than in most other shared situations I've been in, there were almost always constructive projects going on, and problems were resolved as they arose.
Granted, we're talking about people living off the fat of an extremely rich and wasteful land, but the fact still remains that without any kind of stated rules, without an established system of authority, things did not fall apart but actually seemed to work pretty well.
I'm getting a little sappy just thinking about it, but to anybody who's experienced this type of situation, you know how good it can be.

 

[bote]

I also see an irreconciliable difference between anarchism and hierarchy, but I do believe in the possibility of successful anarchist living situations, having had the pleasure of living in a couple.
I've lived in travel/punk houses with alternating casts averaging 20-30 people and amazingly, the fridges were more or less always full, the dishes got done more promptly than in most other shared situations I've been in, there were almost always constructive projects going on, and problems were resolved as they arose.
Granted, we're talking about people living off the fat of an extremely rich and wasteful land, but the fact still remains that without any kind of stated rules, without an established system of authority, things did not fall apart but actually seemed to work pretty well.
I'm getting a little sappy just thinking about it, but to anybody who's experienced this type of situation, you know how good it can be.

 

[IBRRHOBO]

I also see an irreconciliable difference between anarchism and hierarchy, but I do believe in the possibility of successful anarchist living situations, having had the pleasure of living in a couple.
I've lived in travel/punk houses with alternating casts averaging 20-30 people and amazingly, the fridges were more or less always full, the dishes got done more promptly than in most other shared situations I've been in, there were almost always constructive projects going on, and problems were resolved as they arose.
Granted, we're talking about people living off the fat of an extremely rich and wasteful land, but the fact still remains that without any kind of stated rules, without an established system of authority, things did not fall apart but actually seemed to work pretty well.
I'm getting a little sappy just thinking about it, but to anybody who's experienced this type of situation, you know how good it can be.

i'll bite here and not really 'cause i wanna change anyone's mind on anarchy. i'm more of a searcher for facts in ANY cause. so, no rules. yeah, i'd say ur probably right. maslow's heirarchy of needs prevailed: food, clothing and shelter. what i am saying and the issue is being danced around by everyone is this: when society breaks down WHO tells WHOM to do WHAT? see, all the punkers going out to get food sure. going out to get schwill, sure. but tell those folks that they need to get a job and give ALL their money so that the punk house in WADC can get food and schwill and they'll say fuck you.

same applies to creating an anarchist nation. someone has to tell someone else to clean the sewer to get fresh water, to clean the pit at the dumpstation to keep trash flowing, to clean the colostomy bags in the elderly. now those who get told to do it for free while those telling them to do it are getting drunk are gonna be pissed. remember that there's now no money involved, etc.

still waiting on the sucessful revolution...still waiting to hear about the nation still under anarchist control and leadership.........

 

[theshadwdragn]

what i am saying and the issue is being danced around by everyone is this: when society breaks down WHO tells WHOM to do WHAT?

The anarchist model of organization, or how to get things done without an authority telling what do do, has been seen SO many times and has been shown to work on both large and small scale societies. There is this notion embeded in our minds that without someone telling you how to run your life you would be otherwise incapable of doing so. I reject this notion in its entirety.

same applies to creating an anarchist nation. someone has to tell someone else to clean the sewer to get fresh water, to clean the pit at the dumpstation to keep trash flowing, to clean the colostomy bags in the elderly. now those who get told to do it for free while those telling them to do it are getting drunk are gonna be pissed. remember that there's now no money involved, etc.

Again, looking at historical examples (anywhere from the paris commune [largely anarchistic] to the spanish civil war, to communes all over the world) we have figured out numerous ways of running things democratically and autonomously. These have all been simply repressed by force, and if you make the argument that today, the superpowers wouldnt let an anarhist revolution take place, then youve got some sort of point. However making the argument that we dont have the capacity to organize ourselves, youll need to back it up.

I do, however, agree that it is going to take time and that we are nowhere near ready.

 

[farmer john]

I know that society will forcefully decentralize in the near future- (50-100 years maybe) due to issues such as peak oil, peak everything else, and ecocide, and I also know that local communities are inherently more sustainable than cities, and I also know that the planet is severely overpopulated. The scientific ranges given about the Earths carrying capacity for humans has typically been in the range of 100 million-1 billion.

Just sayin'.

amen brutha

i was just telling this to my "teachers" the other day
all the oldtimers ive been talking to feel this way to they all say the same thing that sumthing big and bad is coming and its gunna be up to us(younger folks) to sort out the mess which is gunna be like no other

 

[Beegod Santana]

Interesting discussion, but the one point I haven't seen anyone make (maybe I missed it, I have limited comp time..) is that the us military is capable of squashing a rebellion in a second. As the ex-security supervisor of the fema ops center in new orleans (the strangest job I've ever had by far, maybe in 30 yrs I'll write a full account from an undisclosed location in the swiss alps), I can tell you that a lot of these attrocities that people write zines about and go protest about look like little happy pussy playtime fun hour when compared some of the shit that goes down daily in this country. Your government is not afraid to mow you down en masse. They have done this to citizens on american soil in your life time and they will continue to do so. They also know who the brightest and most influential people in the country / world are, and they also have the falcilities to reach these people and make them offers they can't refuse. Also, the majority of the american public is still very patriotic. If a revolution where to ever get underway enough that the general population where to actually hear about it, you'd see a huge surge of people signing up to fight the resistance, not join it, and lot of them would be people much more adapt at handling a gun then most of the people here calling for a fight.

and I thinks its about time I shut up before I'm looking at another 30 yr conspiricy charge...

 

[farmer john]

^ Has A very Good PoinT

 

[nuckfumbertheory]

I have read a number of very interesting things in this thread some of which I need to think further on. But, there are a couple of things that I would like to say quickly.

One of them is regarding "primitive culture" vs "modern society" I think it is imperative that we get to the point where we understand that we can deconstruct the latter without exactly returning to the former. We don't have to sacrifice the elderly or the sick or the mentally handicapped in order to deconstruct the society (capitalism corporations governments) that destroys the earth. There is a way to have it all we just haven't found it yet. For me if you're anywhere on the path to finding it and living it now then you are already revolutionary.


"I strongly believe in the philosophy that which governs best, governs least. I would even like to take it a step further and say that which governs best governs not at all. And when man is ready for it that is the government he shall have."

Paraphrased HDT

I think about this statement a lot. There are many different ways you can read it. I personally think that a lot of us are already there even though some of you have already said "we still have a long way to go" etc I don't think that is true. I think because a lot of us are already there all we need to do is start creating the world we would like to see right now within the borders of the oppression of our governments and banks etc. All we need to do is create more and more places where the world looks more like the one we would like to see with cooperation instead of competition, finding new ways of doing things that don't have a heavy impact on the environment and refusing to put money into the system that does not follow our values. These things are possible right now and people have already begun making them happen.

 

[Alaska]

"I hate to say this, but i am pretty content with the state of society here."

And that's fine. Why can't it be?

For me, and many other "primitivists", freedom is something we now have to make for ourselves, instead of a birth-right. Our nation, as well as most, deny us the right to live the ways we want to.

If you want all the luxuries and inhuman, unnatural communication of the capitalist world, have it! Take your hierarchies and big macs! But why do I have to? Why does everyone have to?

you do what you want, I do what I want.

But it doesn't work that way in this civilized world of ours. Sub-societies are demonized and destroyed constantly. Labeled as cults, seen as being inferior, and just plain stupid because they don't subscribe to others' morals and beliefs. Their ideals are different, their world is different. We don't destroy every mice nest we find because they bite the heads of other mice pups off! (we just do it because they're not human )

Capitalism has always been a form of living in which annihilation reigns supreme. Alternatives are not allowed, and if you try to resist, you will be destroyed.

Obviously, I know what I want to do, but I still don't know how to do it. It's a conflicted situation. If people want to be Takers, er, I mean citizens of a capitalist society, then they should be able to. But the problem is that Capitalism is inherently all-encompassing. Has been from the start. I don't mean the core concepts, I just mean the way it has been used for so long. It's like a horribly fat, acne-ridden bully who just won't let you finish your fucking book without dumping his milk all over you. You just want to let him be, you're not harming him at all! But he needs to assert himself over you because you're... ta da... different.

So you either fight the bastard until he leaves you alone (or die trying) or you continue to take his shit.

I don't think I want to deal with the fucker anymore.

(P.S.
Has anyone here read My Ishmael? The Taker and Leaver analogy in it was very well done. He manages to successfully reiterate the rise of capitalism and fall of freedom with dancing terms.)

 

[veggieguy12]

(P.S. Has anyone here read My Ishmael? The Taker and Leaver analogy in it was very well done. He manages to successfully reiterate the rise of capitalism and fall of freedom with dancing terms.)

Yeah, it's a pretty good one!
I do hope you read Ishmael and then The Story of B before it, though.

 

[Alaska]

Yeah, I've read most of Quinn's books.

Also, if some people couldn't understand the whole point of my very drunken post from this morning, it really only means one thing: "Our" culture rapes the planet at such an astonishing rate with such greed and malice, that soon we won't even have the personal freedom of starting any kind of sub-societies or "anti-societies", because there won't be any fucking land left to even pitch a goddamn tent on.

I just wish some people weren't so chill about this whole "we're killing our Mother" thing, you know? Not everyone wants to die in such a dismal state. Some people want to be happy before they die. It's definitely worth fighting for, so why not?

:chug::cheers:

 

[newlypoor]

i've had a similar feeling for a little under a year now, and i've asked some people about it who feel the same way. they doesn't mean that anything is definite, of course, but it does make me curious.

oftentimes, when we refer to societal movements, we refer to them as waves. when i did go to school, we had some elderly activists and historians come into our classes from time to time. they often referred to the progression of their movements as something that just happened. as if it suddenly came over people, typically the youth, and there was no stopping it.

i'd like to believe a revolution is coming, but i obviously don't know. revolution isn't impossible, they've occurred before from haitians to usians, cubans to venezuelans. bullet's right though, revolutions start with a shift in thought and personal practices. we can't assume that all revolutions are the same.