violent methodology falls far too short in today’s realities

This post was originally posted on www.anarchistnews.org (and as yet, not sure it will be published).

Note: This line of thinking is part of a semi-”new” project I’ve been honing for the past 15 plus years. It comes from direct experience in the context of intense actions I’ve been a part of and have actually “led” in certain ways. And, it has proven to have openings for inspiring sanity which the so-called “alternative” of violence pointedly does not (except where violence “works” only as a last-ditch reaction or effort to the insanity of martial method –as meted upon so many “third world” peoples).

First, an intense example of the miring effect (like a huge tar pit) where the taking up of arms (or violent response in general) against the State and its minions is this facinatingly instructive:

http://bermudaradical.wordpress.com/2010/08/19/americas-addiction-to-lynching-indians/#more-8615

Look at what happens. Even with the best of reasons. Read this and educate yourself to reality. And possibly learn something crucial!

So can such be avoided?

Maybe not. As history shows (i.e. the much documented illegal f.b.i. program called “cointelpro”), once viewed as “threatening” by extremely sensitive leading martial strategists, even projects fully oriented to the liberation of humanity from tyranny and severe alienation (aka oppression) are likely to be conceived as a threat, even where no designs exist to badly treat or execute the aggressors.

Their dogmatic belief seems to be impossibly stuck in the idea that ALL dissent expressed outside the herd, if allowed to even take shape, is a threat. But perhaps I’m missing something? Perhaps there’s a meta context? Like so much of what passes for political news –leaving out crucial truths because of the orientation of politicians to mobilize and antagonize.

Where am I getting these ideas from? A self-instruction course of “intellectual self-defense” of a wide variety. Studying propaganda (i.e. Jacques Ellul), for one. And institutional analysis (i.e. Chomsky).

And what do I come out of this all with? Not giving up, for one. And two, the bottom line, realizing the value of not getting caught up in any of the confines laid out before us all (whether from the Right, Left, Moderate, or any other political and propaganda-stuck source).

 What is life worth if we don’t try our bests?

What is life worth if we don’t bring our truly inspired humanity, our creative intelligence, to the fore (and, yes, I mean beyond current anarchic practices of “Us vs Them”). And into a methodology of inclusiveness rather than exclusiveness, of radical’s radical empathy, rather than some new hierarchy!).

Not allowing ourselves and our hearts to be trampled, of course, yet not trampling the largely, I think, hidden hearts of the aggressors (and those whom goose-step in their families around them).

Think it through and then let’s speak. Let’s get to the grist of this stuff. And remember, just because it’s been “the” tactic of anti-authoritarian thought since the 1800s doesn’t mean it’s truly valid today.

About these ads

2 Responses to “violent methodology falls far too short in today’s realities”

  1. Dr Stuart Jeanne Bramhall Says:

    I write about my own close encounter with Cointelpro style covert harassment (between 1987 and 2002) in my recent memoir THE MOST REVOUTIONARY ACT: MEMOIR OF AN AMERICAN REFUGEE (www.stuartbramhall.com). I currently live in exile in New Zealand.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

%d bloggers like this: