Freethought, she wrote, was "the right to believe as the evidence, coming in contact with the mind, forces it to believe.
Mencken saw the implications of where his thinking was leading him and he acknowledged those implications frankly. "I am," he wrote in The Smart Set in 1922, "a libertarian of the most extreme variety."
What Thoreau was defending here, in 1849, was essentially the same concept the English philosopher Herbert Spencer defended two years later, in his book Social Statics , as "the right to ignore the State."…
Tucker was a proponent, in the 19th century, of American individualist anarchism. He opposed war because it destroyed liberty, but he favored the allies. Tucker’s contribution was as much through his publishing as his own writing.
But the most effective mechanism ever devised for making effective pooling of our faculties as easy as it can be — the free market — is also the natural result of reducing general laws to a bare minimum and leaving people free to make their own choices about their own values.
http://thebrilliant.org/podcast-player/59/episode-13-your-joy-is-so-bourgeois.mp3Download file | Play in new window | Duration: 1:03:21 | Size: 58M | Recorded on November 20, 2015In this episode of the Brilliant, we begin by discussing briefly what made us first call ourselves anarchists: Aragorn! talks about being realistic by demanding the impossible while Bellamy almost mistakes the episode for a therapy session. We then spend a good bit of time on the Paris attacks, an effort which mutates into a discussion about how we frame analyses of distant events. Finally, we use a thoughtful and lengthy critical e-mail from a listener as a point from which to wander through the subjects of revolution, “changing the world”, pessimism versus passivity, and the meaning of joy.
0:44: A new intro by Aragorn!, so you don’t have to keep skipping past the beginning of the show
1:57: Bellamy frames the episode while and A! occupies himself by clicking and making noise in the background;
2:34: A! tells about how he became an anarchist
6:03: B tells about he became an anarchist
8:57: The call of the wild
9:10: A-News does something sweet and nice for a change
11:30: Aftermath of Paris incident
12:50: Reading from the Appelistas’ (anti-state communists) comment on Paris
13:58: Discussion of Paris attacks: humans as neurotic, caged animals; “there’s this thing called History”; people as mutually incomprehensible; the usefulness of an anti-civilization analysis for understanding the event; people performing ideological functions passively vs. actively; “[Civilization:] there’s no way to fight it other than going camping a lot”
29:50: More from the French commies
30:45: Beautiful sentiments; lived communism as something like dual power; rhetoric based on real relationships vs. abstract concepts
34:40: Response to listener e-mail: J’accuse!; the nature of human nature arguments
39:08: Wildness cannot be denied
39:30: chasm on the possibility of revolution; strategy vs. human-scale thinking
42:10: publishing as an indigenous perspective on revolution – “it looks like telling better stories”
45:20: “changing the world” as discrete vs. continuous; pessimism in the context of metaphysic of world as Becoming; anarcho-lexophilia; anarchism, anarchy, anarchist…choose carefully!; metrics of “success”; pessimism vs. passivity
54:45: Anarchy without emphasis; “You’re so fucked up! – Respond!”
57:41: Unmediated joy; joy vs. happiness; Joy is…bro-like?
Some clarifications and an addition:
When judging The Brilliant, I was doing so only on the basis of the first 4 or 5 episodes. I have since revised my opinion, and find much to love and hate in nearly all subsequent episodes.
The site ‘Consentient’ is the work of myself alone, and so people should not judge Entito Sovrano by anything I write there. Most of the judgments discussed in the above episode of The Brilliant are only the opinion of myself and not him, just as in the last episode of The Unterrified, Entito seemed to accept Bellamy’s position about gender where as I do not, and am happy to be labelled as sounding binary on the matter.
I used the term ‘artsy-artsy’ to mean that I couldn’t really see the point in the podcast, and that I perceived it as mired in references I had no context for, and none was really offered in the podcast. I realise now that one of the reasons I couldn’t understand it was that it is, as proclaimed above, very much a locally-relevant project. I had little or no knowledge of the ‘US anarchist milieu’ outside of publicised events and published writings. Based on my existing knowledge of it, I had never previously desired to know more about it, and after listening to A and B’s descriptions of it, and reading threads such as those that fell out of the Bob Black/Eliot debacle, I feel even less inclined to explore it. If I had to summarise my (perhaps wholly ignorant) impression of US anarchism in general, I would say that it is too focused in on what it perceives as its milieu, without resolving any of the seismic differences in values and principles.
So when I listened to the early episodes, especially the first two, I found myself similarly lost as I am when engaging with the likes of Baudrillard, Foucault, and (sometimes) Debora, where I either don’t understand it, or don’t see the point. Again, I don’t really feel this way anymore.
The term had nothing to do with the use of music or production values, btw.
- Re: Aragorn’s quoting of my response to ‘Indigenous Anarchism’, I’m afraid you’ve misunderstood my meaning completely. I don’t think that ‘Africans’ should be relocated to ‘Africa’. I think both concepts are meaningless. There are no features common to all those labelled as ‘African’ that are not also common to some labelled as ‘Swedish’, and there is no clear boundary between the territorial polity known as ‘Africa’ and any other neighbouring one. Therefore, to my mind, let’s look at actual referents, and try to move past geist. Geist is tearing ‘Africa’ apart. If we look at ‘Kenya’ as one example, we see tribal identities (Kikuyu, Masai, Lamunian), religious geists, neocolonial relics, and other strange and fantastic heists being evoked in almost any conversation about ethics and behaviour relating to this area. And no improvement can be made in the lives of any of the individuals concerned as a result.
Therefore my aim (which I clearly failed at) was to suggest that THERE ARE NO AFRICANS, OR ‘NATIVE AMERICANS’. There are just people. I don’t understand the reification of indigineity at all.
Or perhaps I’ve totally misunderstood it, after reading the essay, a few related ones, and listening to long monologues from Aragorn on the matter?
I’m someone that heavily prefers direct communication to citation and implication, which is why I wrote several messages to you (Aragorn) long before I ever spoke about you to anyone else. That you did not reply (presumably due to being too busy) was not a factor on my lack of interest in the first four episodes, or on my enjoyment of the later ones, but it did mean that we did not have a chance to discuss these ideas directly and therefore I think it was a missed chance for both of us to not misunderstand one another.
- I know that you tend to inject a lot of humour into the topic headings, but do you really thing ‘trash talk’ is appropriate? My understanding of the term (also largely American in usage) is that it represents words spoken so that the recipient does not perform well in a game, be it football or basketball or poker. I promise you that I wish only good things for both A and B.
I look forward to Episode 13. 🙂
Well, I want to thank you for responding to my feedback. I appreciate the ability for my thoughts to be heard by folks around the region that I might not have had been able to talk to face to face. As follow up, I would like to address a few differentiations that only seem pertinent in thinking that I might continue correspondence with y’all, and not something that I feel need be presented as correction or clarification “on air”. First, to the tone of my provocation: Aragorn seemed to be speaking to someone perceived to be new or naive to anarchism in whatever region, I am not. I’ve been participating in person with other people for going on two decades all over the south, midwest, and a bit of the east coast. I have been centered in the same place for half that time, acquired four houses and twenty lots in the same neighborhood, and a commercial space to entrench an offensive. However, I do think that the demystification that Aragorn’s comments would turn such an audience toward, is necessary and might in-value any such cohorts within my social influence. Secondly, yes, Saint Louis is doing everything more precisely than other places in the region, but too aren’t resonating. Most of my impetus isn’t in how to form a midwest identity (scene), but rather how to materialize a density of social life in a place where vastness saturates what seems like a logical conclusion to me, ie that “we” become our only necessity (vague i know). An example would be something like Aragorn’s touching description of the land his father purchased next to those thousands of acres, in that Aragorn described it as being better situated than a lot of his other friend’s attempts. Within two hours of here is 180 acres against a national forest, maybe similar to that situation, but not much has come of it, maybe four people intermittently use it. I ask myself what recipes do we have the ingredients for, as well as who is trying to cook together even?! I am not surprised by any of this, nor disheartened, I’m just trying to live it with the benefit of conversation with y’all. The lack of scene is very welcomed by me, but I want participation. I want to do things with other people. My life in this town is destined to be a form of misery. Fifteen years of anything, and then starting to do it with people new to it, is a dynamic that will be, not only but, alienating to me. We won’t be doing it together, we will be doing it around each other. This is one of the reasons that I want to facilitate more regional cross current.
http://thebrilliant.org/podcast-player/49/episode-nine-indigineity-ii.mp3Download file | Play in new window | Duration: 1:03:18 | Size: 57.95MThis episode concerns indigineity. It is labeled part II but, in fact, should be part I as our first episode on this issue was distracted by more (temporally) pressing items. We begin by returning to our dialogue with the Haters, discussing a critique of anti-civilization discourse, the Rojava reportbacks by Paul Z Simons (who has outed themselves in the last writeup), and then an emo rantish introduction to the topic of Indigineity by Aragorn!
Recorded on October 30th 2015
Join us in conversation by email
Listener Feedback @ 3:15
More on the Haters v Brilliant
Sex life & Freedom
The podcast as circumspection tool
Anti-civ @ 8:55
The comments on @news are great wrt article
Anti-civ is anti-thinking
Who will win the ultimate anarchist idea contest?!
How to win a fight no one wants?
Rojava @ 17:20
What is the motivation of a journalist? How about an activist journalist?
What is the limitation of google vs living in a context (information greed)
Americans exoticize/fetishize international stories
Indigineity @ 27:00
An actual discussion about what A! is for
practice vs identity
spirituality meets the western gaze
references to episode 8 about leadership
Critique of Race Traitor
btw you can hear murmurs throughout this episode by Brick. Here is Brick.
A Quick and Dirty Critique of Primitivist & Anticiv ThoughtFinal Rojava dispatchLocating an Indigenous Anarchism
http://thebrilliant.org/podcast-player/47/episode-nine-the-people.mp3Download file | Play in new window | Duration: 1:03:23 | Size: 58.03MThis episode features Crimethinc. and their To Change Everything tour. We try to turn the conversation into a condemnation on humanism to limited success. We do ask some questions that others may have more complete answers to than we did in this conversation. Obviously we are thankful to Crimethinc for bringing their guests to our neck of the woods to entertain and beguile us with how wonderful other places are. We also respond to some more feedback including a correction from Resonance Audio and more anthropology feedback.
Join us in conversation by email
Correction @ 3:12
the piece was poorly done
Listener Feedback @ 4:30
a special epistemic value
faith, reason, imagination
a priori is a latin word
Rojava I @ 12:40
The tears of Bookchin
Crimethinc events @ 16:55
not about the text…
instead about stories (of a type)
The Justice League and its relationship to anarchism
space vs milieu
daily life and results
preamble to the People @ 31:50
The Work and the Motivation
a defense of media projects
what is healthy and why would someone do it?
The People @ 41:00
Leadership pro and con
To Change Everything text
Is Crimethinc a worthy subject of study?
Our vs the People’s daily life
anarchy 101 if we were abstractions
More nihcom ranting about how resistance doesn’t look like politics (but often self destruction)
How does one distro 100K+?
Resonance DistroTo Change EverythingHostis InterviewT@LNihilist Communism – webNihilist Communism – bookSelf Destruction
Page 1 of 10Older