In a future revolutionary period, the most subtle and most dangerous defenders of capitalism will not be the people shouting pro-capitalist and pro-statist slogans, but those who have understood the possible point of a total rupture. Far from eulogizing TV commercials and social submission, they will propose to change life… but, to that end, call for building a true democratic power first. If they succeed in dominating the situation, the creation of this new political form will use up people’s energy, fritter away radical aspirations and, with the means becoming the end, will once again turn revolution into an ideology. Against them, and of course against overtly capitalist reaction, the proletarians’ only path to success will be the multiplication of concrete communist initiatives, which will naturally often be denounced as anti-democratic or even as.. “fascist”. The struggle to establish places and moments for deliberation and decision, making possible the autonomy of the movement, will prove inseparable from practical measures aimed at changing life.
-Gilles Dauvé: When Insurrections Die (Part 2)
Beloved and respected friends and comrades,
I’ve been putting this off for a little while, because it pertains to those who I “know” only digitally, and those of you whom I know and care for, which is little different than my normal motives for procrastinating. I’m also having difficulty coming to any kind of conclusive conclusion. Sometimes I feel like that straight-edge teen I used to be. The one who had to ignore my friend’s personal habits, if I wanted the friends I had. I’ve since exchanged abstinence for abstention, but the moral highlands get lonely. We all have moments, every day, when our words and actions are not explicitly anarchist ones. That’s no real contradiction. Theory’s theory, and reality is reality. I lack the formal education to decide at what point (or which actions) we rack up enough ‘un-anarchist’ points to get the discount on gas or free coffee or purged from the Movement.
The recent US national election saw many of you anarchists (outside of the title, I’ll refrain from using quotation marks or “self-described” out of respect) publicly endorse and proudly vote for Barack Obama. I was unaware of the existence of modern anarchists in the US in August of 1999, but when I look back, I can find no evidence of any radical fanfare when Franklin Raines became CEO of Fannie Mae.
Looking back, It seems that anarchist involvement in US political conventions seems to be a baby-boomer contribution. I’m unaware of any anarchist actions at the political party conventions before 1968. Other than the tactical lack of Republican mobs in the street, we seem to harbor a soft spot for the Democrats. Maybe later we can figure that one out and we can also discuss why we even protest the political conventions?
This election, many people who identify as anarchists, saw no contradiction in voting. Some of you weren’t even the “hold your nose and vote” types. Some anarchists seem proud of themselves, their country, and their candidate, for the moment, but that’s a moment too long. The reasons you gave us were pretty much the same reasons that people who vote democratic tend to give, plus some debatable notions that democratic administrations allow room for social movements to flourish (like they’re mountain lions) and murky stuff about solidarity. Which you may remember is the flipside of my past endorsements of “the worse of two evils”, because “an increase in open repression, privation, and alienation would push our beloved homogeneous masses to open mutiny” and that “republican policies can hasten the end of US empire quicker than the democrats can”. But I was less than half-serious and never actually went through with it. I didn’t have much internet access before the election, so I was unaware of this backslide into electoral superstition.
The memory escapes me, but I am unaware of democrats nurturing radical social movements, I remember many armed right wing, “partiot” groups, who are in favor of Jesus, if they don’t consider themselves Jesus. This time around, they can protect us from the UN and the Federal Reserve and al Qaeda in Idaho. Dubya just didn’t deploy the black helicopters like Clinton did. Conspiracy kingpin, Alex Jones, should be able to afford an island soon. This is good news for the State security apparatus, because the similarities in views, structure, goals, and appearance between the FBI and the theocratic militias is much easier than these years of tormenting Muslims.
Anarchist voters also had to be pretty certain that Obama would govern from the center-right, in the manner expected of a modern US president, because if he was the “marxist” that right-wing radio still maintain he his, the repression against anarchists would likely be swift and brutal, if the 20th century is any indicator. The 21st century hasn’t proven to be much better.
Some of us knew that the campus radicals were easy prey for the democrats. The rise in anarchist votes in the last two elections seems to be reflective of the recent increase in youth turnout, overall, but many comrades who should have known better, “signed their social contract” last week. It’s not hard to see where material conditions become more of a concern as the acceptable age for youthful rebellion in the US is left behind. Add a few kids to that mix, and anything that has an outside chance to make material conditions even slightly less miserable must seem like a real good idea. Besides, who doesn’t crave some legitimacy every now and again and the pressure exerted by the people around you can be great? I also have the luxury of not being canvassed all day by co-workers.
I think that many of the anarchists who are concerned with building a mass movement of some sort, may have been more susceptible to voting. It’s likely some anti-authoritarians wanted to be on the winning team for a change, because there was that kind of group energy and momentum swirling around the Obama campaign, if you were willing to ignore the structure and aims. The business unions may have made voters out of some the anarchists who are there to radicalize the union. Which is telling, as far as the notion of changing the system from within is concerned, as if that one needed another debunking.
We tend to run with a pretty iconoclastic bunch, so it’s easy to forget, but hard to discount the effect that endorsements by some of the leading lights of mainstream anti-authoritarian academia must had. Bill Ayers probably gave Obama some radical credibility. Or was it radical chic? The republicans simply couldn’t grasp the political reality that people like Ayers are big-money liberal fund-raising props, like their wounded troops and police widows. Liberals love proxy violence and armed-struggle; so long as it is from another time or place, as sure as conservatives love US military and police violence. Zapatistas and Sandinistas and aging bombers are venerated money magnets, but break a window at a present day demo or hit a nazi with a stick and their American Exceptionalism is triggered. They’re incensed.
Like christmas, it’s not easy to avoid being sucked into the campaign reality grid, considering the resources expended on sucking us in. Avoiding Obama’s gravitational pull wasn’t easy, either. I guess even I’d seem pretty attractive if I spent $650 million of someone elses money to do so. I love politics as a spectator sport, though and this cycle was particularly entertaining, but I still don’t have a favorite team. Having lived through seven presidents, it wasn’t hard to figure out that the pendulum would favor a democrat this time around. McCain’s dementia-influenced health care plan which I sill can’t comprehend, was a far cry from the Wall Street sanctioned Obama proposal. When the reality that capitalism is just a game we all agree to play wounded the markets, there was no way Obama could lose. It was almost shocking to be reminded that the democrats were ever skilled at the game of elections.
US elections have also proven to be of extra dubious legitimacy lately, and electronic touchscreens have done little to make the results seem more valid. The participation of people I care about does nothing validate that process for me either. The fraud, intimidation, disenfranchisement, and other irregularities make the powerball seem like a better idea.
Does anyone really believe that the aircraft carrier of State can make a quick 180 degree turn, no matter how cool the captain seems? That’s why there are so many bizarre laws still left on the books, it’s not easy to put these things back into the box, Pandora. The State ensures its existence by passing laws, not repealing them. The issues that separate the US parties are meant to stay unresolved, or all they have to differ on is semantics and the parties would go out of business. Abortion & firearms seem to be the defining ones, and both are here to stay. The need to be armed and voluntary eugenics will never go out of style, as long as this system exists. The firearms manufacturers love democratic presidents, who become amazing gun salesmen through hysteria generated by lobbyists and pundits. Dubya was quite the Planned Parenthood fundraiser. Issues that unite the parties include; staying in Iraq, also known as supporting the troops, and as much surveillance as is technologically and near-economically feasible, which is pretty much just not mentioned by politicians or the media, at all. Obama, as you may recall is a-ok with domestic suveillance, and the “War on Terror®” is the replacement for the cold war. I don’t know which of the “changes” you “believed in” but they apparently weren’t in white house staffers, since 37 of the 41 appointed so far were ex-Clinton lackies. Can we look forward to more “workfare”, humanitarian airstrikes, and extra cops, fresh back from Iraq? Elected democrats are often called upon to prove how ‘tough’ they are on certain issues, typically these are mostly things like “Crime”, “Communism/Terrorism,most-isms”, “Drugs” and ocassionally “Poverty” or “Illiteracy”. The last two aren’t as much a priority, because they seldom involve explosions.
I can’t pretend to begin to have anything even resembling a clue, as far as how many of us the US consider themselves to be anarchists. I’d prefer to be wrong, but it can’t be too many. There’s probably a bigger Fiero owners club. In fact, I doubt that if every anti-authoritarian moved to a sparsely populated US state; all of us put together would not be enough to change the outcome of a US election. The math is what makes any argument for voting moot. I thought we knew our votes didn’t count? Had former 1960’s bomber John McCain won the election would that have jogged your collective memories? Would so many have admitted to voting? The folks who took a sabbatical from practicing anarchist theory and voted were not even a factor. Had you all remained proper abstentionists, like a big chunk of the population who don’t consider themselves anarchists, I wouldn’t be wasting a week on this one post.
Once again, it made little difference to the election whether anarchists participated or not, so I guess it shouldn’t matter to me? I don’t know why I feel a little betrayed, though. Maybe it’s just knowledge of the loss of a shared affinity? After the passage of a little time, I have to question the election as a great historical event. Whites in the US have accepted Tiger Woods as the greatest at an activity that brown-skinned people have traditionally had sense enough to avoid, like skydiving. For 35 years I’ve listened to the blue-collar bigots in my family and neighborhood profess their admiration for Muhammad Ali, a physically dangerous black man with legitimately radical views, who practiced Islam. As long as our celebreties are attractive enough, race can be easily overlooked.
I guess I didn’t campaign too vigorously against this election, out of guilt, which I imagine is what led you to endorse, campaign, and vote for Obama, and why you are still proud of your vote.
Parts of this will be addressed later, but something had to be said.
Love,
27 Comments
Comments RSS TrackBack Identifier URI
The Yinsurrectionary Times 
i definitely have a lot of feelings and responses to this letter… i’d rather discuss them over dinner, than in open letter form, though i’ll probably do both. most swirls around the “murky stuff about solidarity”.
but, (gasp!) maybe you blew off our last dinner date because i was an anarchist who worked for obama 🙂
i doubt it. and seriously, laura misses you. shit, i miss you, and i just saw you.
let’s eat dinner, and i’ll tell you all the reasons i think you shouldn’t feel betrayed, at least by my efforts.
it’s funny… it says no comments, and then displays my comment. maybe it will say “1 comment” now that i have written two.
Well, I’m an Anarchist who participates in politics for better or for worse, and vote din this election, and proudly for Obama.
Why? In the wise words of my father: ‘Spit in one hand, and wish in the other, see which one fills up faster.”
The world I wish to create, mainly through education, does not exist, and so I must live in this world – the outcome of this election actually did have an effect on me and mine, and so voting in it, for the candidate I felt would best move the country into the right direction was my responsibility – as a human. There is no reason or justification for apathy with regards to social climates simply because authority is involved. You’re either active, or you’re not.
Even so, I always vote, for “None of the Above” to make my voice be loud and clear that the candidates are a non choice. Not voting only sends messages of apathy, voting your conscious, does not do that.
it’s a small, but important thing to do. This year I had a choice, and actually supported a candidate.
Anarchism, to me, is far more than simply overturning the State, or objecting to authority – Anarchism inspires personal responsibility, and, a need to help ensure the general welfare of others. Ignoring the problems we face because of the past administration, and opting to ignore the possible outcomes of the election in this pivotal year would in essence means I am ignoring my personal responsibility to do everything I can to ensure the general welfare of others is ensured.
Obviously, that is not an option.
Anok (that’s still cute 30+ years later)
My dad used to say “shit in one hand…”
You are entitled to your opinion that your vote and the outcome both mattered. You seem to be pretty young, yet you make it seem like you’ve voted in 40 or 50 elections.
I hope you’re not planning on teaching english.
Good luck
OK, well, I’m actually quite old, and have voted in plenty of elections both local and national. I’ve been politically active for many years and I see both sides of the argument. Voting and political activism are one way to initiate change. We should use all of the avenues available to us to create the changes we need to make.
I’m not sure why you felt the need to resort to ad hominem attacks, however. Does it bother you to have someone challenge your preconceived notions of Anarchism?
You are still entitled to your opinions. Your first comment confused me and still does. I can’t figure out where you’re coming from.
I’m sorry, I assumed you were younger than you say you are, based on your photo, your interests in pop culture, your belief that power over other can be weilded responsibly your diction, your use of “Anok” and your capitalizing the “A” in anarchism.
You’re not really challenging notions so much as attempting to redefine anarchism. I’m petty ecumenical, but there’s no “state anarchism”. The cub-scout motto isn’t anarchism either.
It’s cold where I live, so there are lots of democrats (and republicans) wearing ski masks right now, and if they want to consider themselves anarchists or ninjas or whatever they have company. There’s no shame in that. You can call yourself whatever you like, and decorate your blog as “radically” as you want to.
Again with the ad hominems. I don’t tolerate elitism well, so you’ll have to excuse me when I ask you what exactly you think Anarchism is. If you don’t know where I’m coming from, then you didn’t read what I wrote. Reading comprehension is key, try it again.
And yes, you capitalize it, because it is a proper noun. Like Christianity, Paganism, etc…
Perhaps I’m a little too old, and still adhere to proper grammar.
Your judging nature and tendency to want to call whatever brand of Anarchism you like best as the be -all end-all is ironic at best.
I read what you wrote, and it still doesn’t make any sense to me. Voting’s benefits are make-believe, unless you sell voting machines. It seems you don’t tolerate any elitism but your own. I don’t need to have any control over your opinions and I don’t need to have control over your life, by choosing a ruler for you. I wish you’d extend me the same courtesies.
Anarchism, to me, is simply the theory that freedom and equality exist only when all social relationships are non-hierarchical and voluntary.
You can’t be a statist anarchist any more than a promiscuous virgin. That’s even sillier than anarcho-capitalism.
Ism’s aren’t proper nouns, except the ones that start with someone’s name, like Christianity or Obamamanism.
I’m actually pretty tolerant of any of the myriad forms of anarchist theory, but a democrat in ski-mask is a democrat in a ski mask, and I have no problem with your fashion decisions.
Remember, I didn’t call you out to “correct your faulty opinions” like you did to me. I’m sure some people consider you a real, bright bulb, but none of them are me. You’re wasting your time, and mine too, but it’s not your fault I’m too dumb to just ignore you.
I never once offered criticisms of your ideals. I offered an answer to your question about the motivations of others (and myself) to which you seem to be so bothered. You didn’t like what I had to say, and countered with a very typical “Anarchists don’t vote” ideology.
You seem upset that I decide to vote, and partake of the system that effects me everyday.
If you cannot understand why one would work with what they have in order to help attain what they desire, I’m sorry. I’m unclear of why you think I’m a statist Anarchist. I am not. What I am, is a realist. My dreams for a world without hierarchy and oppression will not come to fruition in my lifetime, nor in my child’s lifetime. It will not come to fruition by standing idly by. In the meantime, apathy and inaction on various fronts will allow those who do not see the world as you or I do to make all of our decisions for us.
I cannot allow that, and so I choose to act in accordance with my conscious. Your open letter screams of intolerance towards those who are less Anarchist than you, those who have acted in a way you deem inappropriate for Anarchists. This is not equality, nor the freedom of ideas. This is Anarcho-elitism.
Perhaps one day you will get your revolution, and force your ideals on everyone, and turn into the very thing you despise. In the meantime, I will be working to build bridges, offer Anarchist based solutions to Democratic problems, and hopefully initiate the kind of change that will naturally evolve into a world more appropriate for Anarchist beliefs and ideologies.
I have respected your position (mainly by not addressing it) yet you have shown very little respect for the opinions of others.
And if you have a question about why I hide my face, please ask me outright. You don’t need to insinuate like the uber-patriots that call me a terrorist and threaten me and my family. I happily answer questions, without insulting the person who asked.
Sorry, I don’t know you and the internet brings out the worst in me, especially where pointless arguments are concerned. Sorry if I get snippy with you, but I’m frustrated, and I’m not used to you or your communication style.
I still maintain that anarchists don’t vote. There’s a contradiction and more than few jokes regarding anti-authoritarians, who choose a bottom-feeding authority figure to govern their affairs and mine. I don’t know you, but you seem to take yourself and your anarchism pretty seriously. When I do those things, it’s trouble for me. When others do it, it’s amusement or boredom for me.
I’m afraid that many anarchists only voted this time to “prove” they aren’t racists. The USA is still the USA, and Wall St. is still Wall St. It doesn’t matter who pardons the turkey and lights the DC christmas tree. I thought this one was settled 100 years ago.
I don’t really feel intolerance towards the people who took some time off from their anarchism and voted. Some of them are people I care very deeply about, but their lack of faith concerns me. Mostly it makes me sad.
There aren’t enough anarchists to affect a US election, one way or the other, so there was no reason to contradict yourselves. We need to minimize reliance on the State, and participation in meaningless rituals, like voting, isn’t a bad place to start.
Will the voting anarchists resist Obama’s war(s)? Whether it’s Iran, Pakistan, or some place tbd in Africa? Or will they enlist in Obama’s military?
>In the meantime, apathy and inaction on various fronts will allow those who do not >see the world as you or I do to make all of our decisions for us.
Which is what happens when you cast your vote. Obama & the right-wing democrat hacks and loyalists he is rewarding with high-level jobs in the administration don’t see the world the way we do. Neither party does.
It’s “conscience”, not “conscious”.
“My revolution” has no ideals to force on anyone. I advocate the insurrectionary theory of anarchism, the one that is honest enough to admit that we have no plan for the new world, but first priority is to eliminate the old. The syndicalists, greens, and identity-oriented groups have a future program, but we don’t.
The flags and patriotic doo-dads on the blog gave me the impression that you favor some kind of state anarchism. There’s an inherent contradiction from the etymology, on.
I don’t care how you or anyone else dresses, (that’s not exactly true, the teenagers who don’t wear coats when it’s cold drive me crazy). You hide your face for the same reason any intelligent person does. Have you noticed I use a little cartoon picture to represent me? I wish you were a terrorist, and especially sorry that the flagsuckers threaten you and your family.
My big problem is people pretending that they did some great thing by voting. It’s easy for me to accept that anarchists voted for the hell of it, or that they saw the contradictions, or the humor, but it had nothing to do with being an anarchist than my recent firearms background check.
All this voting bummed me out, especially at a time when post-left theories were, if not gaining acceptance, being engaged in petty arguments on the internet and some people were defending these theories, although the degree of actual practice is unknown.
The prospect of anarchists not pretending that it was 1886 and engaging in some critical thinking about activism, giving way to campaigning and voting. I understand what the paid campaigners were doing, but the outright volunteers? I fear that the democrats will take advantage of activist tendencies in anarchism and exploit the people who get into that sort of thing.
The democrats have always been a nasty bunch. When you see footage of some old southern politician screaming crazy racist shit, odds are he’s a democrat
At the end of the day, I’m sorry I started getting into petty internet arguing, about something that really doesn’t matter to me or to the big picture. Digital alienation has me being rude to a stranger for no good reason.
You seem like a nice enough, reasonable enough person, but after two years of the big-budget stage show of some pretty intense campaigning, I’m burned out on all the “rah-rah, let’s vote” stuff, (except “vote or die” that one makes me belly laugh every time) and all the Messiah & Maverick stuff. Plus the weather is bumming me out.
I wish you nothing but the best.
Glad to see you back posting relevant news and views. Maybe some voted for Obama because they thought that at least there was a possibility of a few less brown people being killed, and that participating in punching a screen wasn’t really evidence of legitimizing the system any more than not voting really delegitimizes the system, unless dual power structures are built.
I’m almost certain that the paranoid militias, fascist groups, and the expanded (Pakistan?) Afghan war can pick up the “brown people being killed” slack. The system is doing a fine job of deligitimizing itself. Turnout wasn’t much higher than recent elections. Dual-power structures are fine, but easily co-opted and are not a prerequisite to determine the legitimacy of any system, but themselves. State relief programs are instituted to prevent the formation of such structures, so if it’s dual-power you want, maybe the GOP is where it’s at?
The notion that a vote somehow impacts policy implies a certain legitimacy for the State. Or is it clairvoyance?
I am an anarchist because I don’t consent to be governed.
I don’t consent to be governed by John McCain or Barack Obama,
and I stand in solidarity (on this issue at least) with anyone who feels the same.
When I voted, I didn’t sign any social contract.
Even if there was such a contract, if it said, “By checking this box I consent to be governed by the winner of this election,” I’d feel no compunction about checking the box without actually giving my consent. Why? Because I didn’t consent to this oppressive system in the first place, and I feel it’s my prerogative and everyone else’s to make the best of a bad situation. I do believe that voting does something. I believe that in most cases, it allows a majority of those who choose to vote to select from among two options.
I guess I was a “hold your nose” voter. I made the best choice I could, but I didn’t feel particularly proud. I shared my reasons for choosing as I did with others, because I had spent quite a long time considering them, but beyond that I did not campaign. I know that, for the same reasons I felt it was worth voting, others felt it was worth campaigning, and I can see that. I could even imagine making the decision to campaign in such a situation, although if I did I would be a “hold your nose” campaigner.
Barack Obama is maybe, possibly, probably, almost certainly not all that. But the happiest I felt about voting was when he was elected and it seemed like everyone on television, black, white, and otherwise, was crying for joy. I’ll admit to not crying myself, but you know what? If it had been Hillary I might have, despite the fact that to all appearances she’s an evil motherfucker just like the rest of them. There’s a certain validation that goes along with the fact that whatever else their reasons might be, people aren’t not voting for someone just because of their race of sex. It’s not the end of racism or sexism by a long shot, but to a lot of people I think it feels like the beginning of the end, and that can be really significant on a personal level in terms of combating a lifetime of societally mandated self-hatred. There’s even a deep, dark part of myself that would have found it a little liberating to see Palin, a woman who presents herself as also having working class consciousness, elected, even while I would have been puking my guts up and stockpiling RU-486.
Which brings me to my next point. In general I don’t hold much with the concept of “rights”, which by definition are freedoms “allowed” by a government. However, there are some of these freedoms that I feel strongly about, as I mentioned in my blog, and if an anarchist revolution should come in five years, or ten years, I’m willing to sacrifice my personal sense of political purity for these realities over the course of those years. These include the freedom of women to choose safe abortions, and of course for Iraqis not to be blown up. I am betting that Obama will be better for these realities, although I could be wrong. However, I didn’t feel that I could allow this uncertainty to cause me not to contribute in a small way to the making of this pathetic decision.
I understand the reasons that many anarchists chose not to vote; some I agree with and some I do not (to a large extent I find abstention to be symbolic rather than practical, and I wonder if anyone is even watching). There are also lots of other things that many anarchists choose to do or not do that I don’t agree with, but I think there are too few of us to go around writing each other off over these disagreements.
Also, as James mentioned, I miss you. Hopefully we can hang out some time, and discuss these issues (or not).
P.S. I was in a long discussion on this topic on a mailing list, where it was pointed out that historically, radical movements are generally stronger and more revolutions occur under slightly liberal governments. Not necessarily because they’re “allowed” or supported, but because people realize that even the better of the two evils still sucks. Let’s drink to that, in this case, and see what the inauguration brings.
That’s an interesting take on your personal reasons for voting but I still can’t reconcile voting and anarchism. Maybe one it will work itself out, and participation in electoral politics will become part of what it means to be an anarchist the US, but it currently doesn’t jibe with the historical continuity (or basic etymology). Seems more likely that the democrats have a substantial far-left, in the short-term.
I’m well aware that my abstention didn’t count any more than your vote. It was like belonging to a Madalyn Murray O’Hair reading group and everyone suddenly starts talking about taking communion at mass, though. Or the “vegetarians” who eat poultry and seafood. I considered abstentionism to be a stable “point of unity”, (as the activists say) amongst the myriad anarchist tendencies. It’s a simple (in-, un-?)action, consistent in anarchist theory and practice, and I liked being able to make that assumption.
What freaks me out the worst is the riffing on the “White Man’s Burden” that I keep seeing being used to justify it from so many others. As far as I know most of the anarchists I know who took a little time off from opposing the State to vote didn’t justify it in those terms.
It’s like when I used to write papers for people in college for money, and I’d get them a good grade, except the time I had write on market economics for my brother, which in the end I was unable to do, no matter how I researched it. It was just alien to me by that point in my life. Same with electoral politics. I just can’t personally comprehend it. Same with the Grateful Dead, the Grand Theft Auto franchise, hockey, pornography, and cocaine. Thanks, but no thanks. Voting is just another consumer choice to me, but I do understand the futility of boycotts, too.
I don’t think the substance of what Obama will do is much different than what McCain would have done, although the style and language would change. That’s one for the alternate-historians. It almost seems like the candidates had agreed to pick the same cabinet and staff before the election. I had trouble opposing the Afghan war for that reason, because so much of the opposition was wrapped up in the “stolen” election, and how differently Al Gore would have done things, which seemed absurd to me. Abortion will remain legal, barring some kind of 9/11-like event that would somehow necessitate cracking down on reproductive health. There will be US troops in Iraq as long as there’s a US. A State is a State is a State.
The realities of the US of A and it’s priorities won’t change, but there’s a brand new illusion, a mythical narrative that will legitimize the system for people who were very reluctant to get on board. Half-revolutions are awful things. People who would never identify with the current and future wars will likely do so now. The media narrative spells out the end of institutional racism.
I never quite got to the part where I mention that I (we) miss yinz too. I’m (We’re) just having an extra reclusive winter and I personally have no sense of time. And I’ll drink to that or whatever else you’ve got. Often more liberal governments are more inclined to use social programs as a soft form of oppression, though ala FDR.
i love my wife.
I hope you do. You better. It’ll never work if you don’t.
i continue to stall my full response here…
but there’s a draft on my desktop… it’s comin!
in the meantime it’s great to see the yinsurgent so active!!!
Stall away! The Greek model is my “hope” and “change”. At the rate things are going, that was likely to be the last US election anyhow.
Given my recent issues with getting dressed and leaving the house, this is active as I can be, these kinds of video games.
Short form of this post.
I try to not justify my dubious personal decisions in the name of “anarchy”, and I wish you wouldn’t, either.
I am an anarchist and I vote. I didn’t vote for fucking Barack Obama though because he’s a huge-government socialist. Same reason I didn’t vote for John McCain. Both parties just want us to move itno a totalitarian police state, it doesn’t matter who wins the elections because either way the parties will end up meeting their goals of a New World Order.
I voted. That is, I signed a petition to legalize medical marijuana. If you want to bring the state down and think that voting in a presidential election is the way to do it, then you should vote republican. Anyway, it does not matter who you voted for, obama or mccrap, people have died since obama took office. If I ever see any of you in my presence, I will hold you responsible.
If you live in Weston Florida and plan on refinancing an existing mortgage or get a new mortgage beware of scam artist Tulio J. Rodriguez. This so called “Mortgage & Finance Specialist” will tell you just about anything to get your business. His group of scavengers “Real Estate Agents and Mortgage Specialists” lie through their teeth to take your money.
Haha I am actually the first reply to your amazing post?
yinsurgent.wordpress.com’s done it once again! Incredible post!