(no subject)
Me and my former interest Emily had a brief discussion in government class the other day about pacifism.
I really forget how it came up, but I started talking about violent revolution or something and she got on her soapbox about some new 'concepts' she's been supporting lately or something.
She said how the WTO protests at Seattle were 'bullshit', and how no one would take them seriously because they were being VIOLENT!(gasp) and shit like that.
Then, proceeds to call me 'immature' for holding onto the idea of violence and bloody revolution.
First of all, fuck pacifism.
Pacifism is THE ABOLSUTE WEAKEST concept I've heard about change. And let it be known first that peace and pacifism are two completely different things. I am a proponent of eventual peace, not pacifism.
Pacifism is a favorite amongst collegiate neo-liberals, kids who would rather wear Karl Marx as some sort of artsy fashion symbol than a sign of protest. The type of people who camp out in public parks and picket with signs all day so they can go to their caribou coffee and act like they know what 'free speech' is all about.
Fuck those kids.
Look, how was this country formed? A bunch of farmhands and expatriates sitting around a coffee table discussing 'peaceful' measures? No, violent battles.
Communist revolutions-not one of them non-violent.
Don't speak to me about pacifism with your gourmet coffee, thrift-store t-shirts and "I am sooo liberal! persona.
You can't simply negotiate when you're upset. When I'm pissed off at something going on in the country, I don't take my leaders out to lunch and 'propose a change'. When changes need to be 'seriously' made, violence must take place. Governmental leaders' heads must roll.
I apologize, but that's the way things have always been and the way things will always be.
And besides, if you don't see something beautiful in violent revolution, something poetic about it, then completely dismiss anything communist or socialist because you'll never get it.
And the first retort some of you will come up with, no doubt, will be 'Well, what are YOU doing?! I don't see YOU doing anything?!'
Violent revolutions should take place where a good number of people are assembled. One person throwing molotov cocktails at the capitol building would be great...but futile. But once you get that number together, the thing isn't to walk out from your tofu lunch and carry signs all day. Take a little action.
The WTO protests were one of the most wondrous things to happen to modern America.
And future events like that won't come with hand-holding. Pacifism is dead, a "Dead Language Of Love"T(I)NC.
Fight a real fight.
I really forget how it came up, but I started talking about violent revolution or something and she got on her soapbox about some new 'concepts' she's been supporting lately or something.
She said how the WTO protests at Seattle were 'bullshit', and how no one would take them seriously because they were being VIOLENT!(gasp) and shit like that.
Then, proceeds to call me 'immature' for holding onto the idea of violence and bloody revolution.
First of all, fuck pacifism.
Pacifism is THE ABOLSUTE WEAKEST concept I've heard about change. And let it be known first that peace and pacifism are two completely different things. I am a proponent of eventual peace, not pacifism.
Pacifism is a favorite amongst collegiate neo-liberals, kids who would rather wear Karl Marx as some sort of artsy fashion symbol than a sign of protest. The type of people who camp out in public parks and picket with signs all day so they can go to their caribou coffee and act like they know what 'free speech' is all about.
Fuck those kids.
Look, how was this country formed? A bunch of farmhands and expatriates sitting around a coffee table discussing 'peaceful' measures? No, violent battles.
Communist revolutions-not one of them non-violent.
Don't speak to me about pacifism with your gourmet coffee, thrift-store t-shirts and "I am sooo liberal! persona.
You can't simply negotiate when you're upset. When I'm pissed off at something going on in the country, I don't take my leaders out to lunch and 'propose a change'. When changes need to be 'seriously' made, violence must take place. Governmental leaders' heads must roll.
I apologize, but that's the way things have always been and the way things will always be.
And besides, if you don't see something beautiful in violent revolution, something poetic about it, then completely dismiss anything communist or socialist because you'll never get it.
And the first retort some of you will come up with, no doubt, will be 'Well, what are YOU doing?! I don't see YOU doing anything?!'
Violent revolutions should take place where a good number of people are assembled. One person throwing molotov cocktails at the capitol building would be great...but futile. But once you get that number together, the thing isn't to walk out from your tofu lunch and carry signs all day. Take a little action.
The WTO protests were one of the most wondrous things to happen to modern America.
And future events like that won't come with hand-holding. Pacifism is dead, a "Dead Language Of Love"T(I)NC.
Fight a real fight.