letter regarding SD activism
To a San Diego activist regarding a news article on San Diego radicals.
Let me preface by saying, I no longer reside in San Diego, but I spent years there giving my labor, invention and compassion to San Diego's radical movement and I have always considered you a comrade (although I've only known your work from a distance).
First, I wouldn't be so quick to consider the San Diego "radicals" as "youth" or necessarily "anarchist". While the circle of radicals is seemingly small, young and dressed in black, they *have* solidarity for very different reasons. And there are many behind the curtain that help in many ways, but may feel reserved in action for various reasons. After all, association was enough to get you Black Listed 50 years ago.
I took to the streets with the radicals in black just before the war started. I was fed up with parades that only seemed like excuses for people to say "they did something", "they followed their conscience". What what were they doing? Don't get me wrong.. they have their place with many throughout the world, like on J20. But why stop there? Are you being true to your principles if you pick up a starbucks on the way home from the SDCPJ rally? I think that most people are overwhelmed by the level of corruption all around them, 24/7. It creates an existential crisis only best medicated with consumerism and seeming practices of Free Speech. No one really believes they have anything to say any more, that is worth protecting. I am not an anarchist, nor have I ever really considered myself one. However, many of the methods and means of anarcho-syndicalism I am on board with, namely direct action. Many people have many different ideas about what constitutes direct action and what is considered ethical direct action. Where I have found that much of the "Peace movement" has failed, is this idea that you on board and subscribe to every last opinion of your organization, or you are not one of us. While consensus has it's place there is also an absence from vote. When I put on my black sweater and cover my face, I am supporting an action, at that time, in solidarity. And at every point in an action, I am re-evaluating my participation, effectiveness, and ethical consent. And if another group were to dress in black, the next day and I did not have ethical consent for that action, I simply do not participate, it's my vote. I've heard numerous people discount the entire "liberal" movements based on bumper sticker slogans. Granted, most people aren't given much more than a sound bite these days anyways, hence the importance of alternative media sources. It's no different that voting for Boxer because she's pro-choice or Bush because he's pro-rich.
We MUST NOT allow ourselves to be pigeon holed into one liners. I'd happily participate in monkey wrenching the "Friends of the Border Patrol" but I don't appreciate it being under the banner of "Tear down the border". How many of us really, honestly talk about politics, current events, means of livelihood with each other, friends, neighbors, comrades. How many of us really listen, contemplate and return with questions for clarity. Why aren't we arming ourselves with political theory, philosophy and history. If our aim is not to repeat history, then we mustn't tear down the emperors of the past, lest we forget. Perhaps if our movements had better understandings of each others ideal ends and *means*, instead of getting caught up in particulars of mission statements or bumper sticker slogans, we'd have a greater sense of *solidarity* as one people, trying to go to one (better) place together.
Let me preface by saying, I no longer reside in San Diego, but I spent years there giving my labor, invention and compassion to San Diego's radical movement and I have always considered you a comrade (although I've only known your work from a distance).
First, I wouldn't be so quick to consider the San Diego "radicals" as "youth" or necessarily "anarchist". While the circle of radicals is seemingly small, young and dressed in black, they *have* solidarity for very different reasons. And there are many behind the curtain that help in many ways, but may feel reserved in action for various reasons. After all, association was enough to get you Black Listed 50 years ago.
I took to the streets with the radicals in black just before the war started. I was fed up with parades that only seemed like excuses for people to say "they did something", "they followed their conscience". What what were they doing? Don't get me wrong.. they have their place with many throughout the world, like on J20. But why stop there? Are you being true to your principles if you pick up a starbucks on the way home from the SDCPJ rally? I think that most people are overwhelmed by the level of corruption all around them, 24/7. It creates an existential crisis only best medicated with consumerism and seeming practices of Free Speech. No one really believes they have anything to say any more, that is worth protecting. I am not an anarchist, nor have I ever really considered myself one. However, many of the methods and means of anarcho-syndicalism I am on board with, namely direct action. Many people have many different ideas about what constitutes direct action and what is considered ethical direct action. Where I have found that much of the "Peace movement" has failed, is this idea that you on board and subscribe to every last opinion of your organization, or you are not one of us. While consensus has it's place there is also an absence from vote. When I put on my black sweater and cover my face, I am supporting an action, at that time, in solidarity. And at every point in an action, I am re-evaluating my participation, effectiveness, and ethical consent. And if another group were to dress in black, the next day and I did not have ethical consent for that action, I simply do not participate, it's my vote. I've heard numerous people discount the entire "liberal" movements based on bumper sticker slogans. Granted, most people aren't given much more than a sound bite these days anyways, hence the importance of alternative media sources. It's no different that voting for Boxer because she's pro-choice or Bush because he's pro-rich.
We MUST NOT allow ourselves to be pigeon holed into one liners. I'd happily participate in monkey wrenching the "Friends of the Border Patrol" but I don't appreciate it being under the banner of "Tear down the border". How many of us really, honestly talk about politics, current events, means of livelihood with each other, friends, neighbors, comrades. How many of us really listen, contemplate and return with questions for clarity. Why aren't we arming ourselves with political theory, philosophy and history. If our aim is not to repeat history, then we mustn't tear down the emperors of the past, lest we forget. Perhaps if our movements had better understandings of each others ideal ends and *means*, instead of getting caught up in particulars of mission statements or bumper sticker slogans, we'd have a greater sense of *solidarity* as one people, trying to go to one (better) place together.