[iDC] activism now and
jhopkins at neoscenes.net
Sat Dec 10 11:12:08 EST 2005
In answer to some of Saul's questions, et al...
some comments on the latest threads... probably been said before
elsewhere on this or other lists, but when the question of WHAT TO
DO? is posed so poignantly on the list. well, hell, I've got an
answer that I have tested in many situations against many incomplete
(unfortunately, it cannot be fully transmitted via this particular
medium which apportions attention into too-small bits to allow
coherence. if anybody is interested in skyping, phoning, irc-ing, or
otherwise synchronizing for a couple hours at a pass, I'd be totally
willing to engage at that level).
while I have great respect for people who choose resistance as a
model for political expression, I believe that more often than not,
resistance simply acts as a counter-balancing prop that holds up
that-which-is-being-resisted. as a simple anecdote from the distant
Reagan era: it appeared that Reagan would take some action --
declare a covert war, make an attack on alternative culture, or
simply say something stupid -- and there would be a flood of artists
who would 'make art' about that action. this is the definition of
(a) reactionary. it seemed, with the original "teflon" president,
that critical actions and expressions, no matter how intelligent or
caustic simply built up Reagan's power. that the repetition of his
name in song, discussion, and print only served as a constructive
support not for the resistance, but for sustaining the regime.
reactionary art. easy to find inspiration (in the embodiment of
that-which-is-to-be-resisted), no need to hunt. somehow comforting
to have a daily dose of Reagan (or Bush) to get the fires stoked.
revolution, on the other hand, seeks the unknown. it does not seek
to form and replicate itself through impressive contact with a
dominant social system. if anthing, it leans on the void.
a revolutionary praxis is a pathway that is not mapped before moving
along it. it is sustained by a desire to face the unknown and to
change with the flux of life. it does not advertise its presence
except by the wake arising from the actions that transmit its energy
to the surrounding milieu.
a revolutionary praxis is by definition sustainable, albeit unstable
and indeterminate. it does not seek to capture defined social
pathways for its expression. it leaks energy into the immediate
surroundings through its presence. leakage is the same as
idiosyncratic expression -- expression that may not be immediately
recognizable to those standing around it because of the idiosyncracy.
participating in revolutionary praxis demands no allegiance. it
demands acquiescence to flows that are greater than any
political/social system. it does not shout. it moves always. it
cannot be a target because when aimed at, it's gone. everything is
the site of revolution is the minimal system necessary for change.
this system is the exchange that happens between two beings.
broadband, unpredictable. without the Self opening freely to an
Other who reciprocates, there is no possibility for revolution when
revolution is defined by constant movement and change. revolution
cannot be posited to happen 'out there' in an abstracted social
technology is that which mediates between the Self and the Other. IT
is just another mediation. when revolution sits on a base of
human-to-human connection, the level of mediation can be quite
variable, as long as it allows the movement of enough energy to
maintain connection. this level is different for different people.
Sorry, have to cut this off in mid-thought and focus back on the
ground situation: a dying parent.
indeterminacy: four works
a new neoscenes DVD featuring four new visual/sonic explorations
more info at http://www.neoscenes.net/aud-vid/video/indeter.html
More information about the iDC