26/06: Ohio
Tin soldiers and Nixon coming,
We're finally on our own.
This summer I hear the drumming,
Four dead in Ohio.
Gotta get down to it
Soldiers are gunning us down
Should have been done long ago.
What if you knew her
And found her dead on the ground
How can you run when you know?
Gotta get down to it
Soldiers are gunning us down
Should have been done long ago.
What if you knew her
And found her dead on the ground
How can you run when you know?
Tin soldiers and Nixon coming,
We're finally on our own.
This summer I hear the drumming,
Four dead in Ohio.
-Neil Young, Ohio
---
I think Neil Young had a great analysis of the situation after the Kent State massacre. It is when the state uses violence against the people empowered that make us feel the illegitimacy of the state. It is rather spiritual, a cleansing to see state violence against people, all sentiments of protection from the benevolent arms of the government are stripped away. Only the conservative/reactionary/cynical voice of power makes sense when describing the use of state force against a people angered over their policies. The state is there to enforce order, if people are doing things that could create a disruption of their order, the state will assert itself to twart the disruption.
If the state or capitalism is doing things we don't agree with, the liberals, the left and the anarchists take to the streets. The liberals grant law enforcement and riot control legitimacy when people resist, the only actions you can do is civil disobedience, which is always nonviolent and usually respectful of property rights. The left is more heterogenius, fans of democracy tend to side with the liberals, differing usually on policies or the scale of reforms. In regards to law enforcement, the jargon is different but the sentiment is usually pro-civil disobedience. Its when we examine the leftists with a critique of democracy that we see more of a desire to be pro-resistance, but with some desire to cooperate. Afterall, with a change of political power, the bureas will remain relatively unchanged.
What disrupts this is either an uncontrolled rupture from the working class outside the political landscape or when the police or military attacks their own nation. This is when other people agree with anarchists, who tend to agree or justify most actions against the state from non or anti-political people. However, in the former expression, the liberals will tend to condemn the disruption, the left will sometimes split, but more often they will be sympathetic, but prefer that order be restored. This is because the riot is not given any legitimacy as a force of power in and of itself by authority. Others describe it merely as disgruntlement, but not as anything more. They want to restore order, some offering concessions to get people to calm down.
This is ultimately what the liberals and the left want to do with the current war, force the government to give in on the war and while they won't typically defend a riot, they will defend its sentiment because it gives them political clout. But when the state breaches its legitimacy of governance, the latter example, the liberals and the left begin looking for other options. "We're finally on our own" is great language for this change in political opinion and ideas of political revolution take shape.
Anarchists must compete with all political sentiment, our alternative to political revolution is social revolution, but before we can talk of such things, we must be in a situation when political revolution is just as possible. Defending riots as an expression of the people's will and an attempt to claim space for their own desires is how anarchists see and express power in these situations. These things have to exist before they are actually possible and we can't manage them into existence.
The current war lacks the will to claim space outside of anarchists and the small numbers of other diseffected individuals. Anarchists have moved past wars before when it was clear that they didn't have the power necessary to maintain a resistance the majority doesn't support. The crisis of sustainability is the greater foundation we should be working to overcome. It is the reason our nation is at war. Being simply against the war can only be political in this climate, what makes anarchists legitimate in this developing crisis isn't summit hopping, but by developing collaborations that create a sustainable now in our own world for those individuals we touch.
The United State's government, its businesses, its media and its bureaus must fuck up beyond their control for something sudden to occur to change this situation. Their control relies on the atomization and division of people as well as maintaining the possibilities of consumerist desire. If the working class overcomes this, then we could see power beyond affinity groups, clusters and protest mobs. To maximize this possibility, anarchists in the United States create spaces experimenting in sustainability and offer it as direct action. Recognizing this as beneficial and expanding on it is the key to breaking the war spectacle.
We're finally on our own.
This summer I hear the drumming,
Four dead in Ohio.
Gotta get down to it
Soldiers are gunning us down
Should have been done long ago.
What if you knew her
And found her dead on the ground
How can you run when you know?
Gotta get down to it
Soldiers are gunning us down
Should have been done long ago.
What if you knew her
And found her dead on the ground
How can you run when you know?
Tin soldiers and Nixon coming,
We're finally on our own.
This summer I hear the drumming,
Four dead in Ohio.
-Neil Young, Ohio
---
I think Neil Young had a great analysis of the situation after the Kent State massacre. It is when the state uses violence against the people empowered that make us feel the illegitimacy of the state. It is rather spiritual, a cleansing to see state violence against people, all sentiments of protection from the benevolent arms of the government are stripped away. Only the conservative/reactionary/cynical voice of power makes sense when describing the use of state force against a people angered over their policies. The state is there to enforce order, if people are doing things that could create a disruption of their order, the state will assert itself to twart the disruption.
If the state or capitalism is doing things we don't agree with, the liberals, the left and the anarchists take to the streets. The liberals grant law enforcement and riot control legitimacy when people resist, the only actions you can do is civil disobedience, which is always nonviolent and usually respectful of property rights. The left is more heterogenius, fans of democracy tend to side with the liberals, differing usually on policies or the scale of reforms. In regards to law enforcement, the jargon is different but the sentiment is usually pro-civil disobedience. Its when we examine the leftists with a critique of democracy that we see more of a desire to be pro-resistance, but with some desire to cooperate. Afterall, with a change of political power, the bureas will remain relatively unchanged.
What disrupts this is either an uncontrolled rupture from the working class outside the political landscape or when the police or military attacks their own nation. This is when other people agree with anarchists, who tend to agree or justify most actions against the state from non or anti-political people. However, in the former expression, the liberals will tend to condemn the disruption, the left will sometimes split, but more often they will be sympathetic, but prefer that order be restored. This is because the riot is not given any legitimacy as a force of power in and of itself by authority. Others describe it merely as disgruntlement, but not as anything more. They want to restore order, some offering concessions to get people to calm down.
This is ultimately what the liberals and the left want to do with the current war, force the government to give in on the war and while they won't typically defend a riot, they will defend its sentiment because it gives them political clout. But when the state breaches its legitimacy of governance, the latter example, the liberals and the left begin looking for other options. "We're finally on our own" is great language for this change in political opinion and ideas of political revolution take shape.
Anarchists must compete with all political sentiment, our alternative to political revolution is social revolution, but before we can talk of such things, we must be in a situation when political revolution is just as possible. Defending riots as an expression of the people's will and an attempt to claim space for their own desires is how anarchists see and express power in these situations. These things have to exist before they are actually possible and we can't manage them into existence.
The current war lacks the will to claim space outside of anarchists and the small numbers of other diseffected individuals. Anarchists have moved past wars before when it was clear that they didn't have the power necessary to maintain a resistance the majority doesn't support. The crisis of sustainability is the greater foundation we should be working to overcome. It is the reason our nation is at war. Being simply against the war can only be political in this climate, what makes anarchists legitimate in this developing crisis isn't summit hopping, but by developing collaborations that create a sustainable now in our own world for those individuals we touch.
The United State's government, its businesses, its media and its bureaus must fuck up beyond their control for something sudden to occur to change this situation. Their control relies on the atomization and division of people as well as maintaining the possibilities of consumerist desire. If the working class overcomes this, then we could see power beyond affinity groups, clusters and protest mobs. To maximize this possibility, anarchists in the United States create spaces experimenting in sustainability and offer it as direct action. Recognizing this as beneficial and expanding on it is the key to breaking the war spectacle.
