Tag Archives: anti-capitalist

And a Very Rough Translation… #Tarnac 9, 10, 11…

Julien Coupat, alleged leader of the Tarnac group continued to sabotage TGV lines, testified Thursday at the trial of one of his former lawyers.

The lawyer was pursued by police for “public defamation” on the sidelines of Tarnac folder.

It was not yet the trial of Tarnac but the hearing held before the 17th chamber of the Paris court offered Julien Coupat its first judicial forum.

“Today the Tarnac Affair seems to be a court case concerning a sabotage but initially it was a political matter and police”, launched at the bar the witness, little round glasses, jeans and sweater collar rolled.
“Obsessions Michele Alliot-Marie”
“It’s been years of surveillance, secret service documents, the assumption that after the CPE (the first employment contract, ed) would have been a more radical splinter group that would move toward the establishment of a network pre- international terrorist. It was the obsessions of the Interior Minister Michele Alliot-Marie and the first case of the DCRI (domestic intelligence) recently created, “said he summarized.

“We are from the beginning against a machine and we defend as we can with the means at hand. This is not a defeat for us is simply that they are the strongest, “he ruled.

Julien Coupat was sent in corrections with seven other libertarian activists after the statement but the judge did not accept the qualification “terrorist” folder. The prosecution appealed.

His former lawyer Jérémie Assous appeared for “public defamation”, pursued by one of the investigators of the case, Bruno Mancheron.
At the origin of the complaint, a radio statement
The police captain in countering subsection (SDAT) has signed a key record of the case, which reflected a Julien Coupat surveillance operation and his ex-girlfriend Yildune Levy on 7 and 8 October 2008.

It is during this monitoring that the couple’s vehicle was found parked near a train line Paris-Est in the municipality of Dhuisy (Seine-et-Marne), where a few hours later were discovered traces of the sabotage of a catenary.

At the origin of the complaint is a statement of Jérémie Assous on Europe 1 on October 23, 2012. “Mr. Mancheron who is the author of f …,” he declared, before recovering ‘trial Proceedings of spinning and is accused of being a forger. “

“Mr. Assous knew that my customer was assisted witness status and was therefore charged with anything. My client has had enough of the brunt of the aggressive defense strategy Coupat of lawyers “, argued the police officer of the Board, Mr. Renaud Le Gunehec, which claimed one euro in compensation.

Advertisements

The Wrath of Morrissey Versus the Wrap of Maccie D’s

Every time the newish McDonald’s advert comes on during the adverts between halves at Euro 2016, it is irksome to say the least to hear the strains of Pete Shelley (who grew up about half a mile from where I’m writing this) and his fellow Buzzcocks, and their song, What Do I Get?, whilst a faux-Punk food assistant person of the biological female genus prepares a wrap for a pubescent adolescent, who happens to be in the company of his papa, it seems, seated as they are in a Ford Cortina circa 1978 (which conveniently links, or links conveniently, depending on how you feel with split infinitives, to the era said song hails from) at the window of the McD’s drive-thru, and as the pubescent adolescent fairly drools over the food assistant person as much as you’d imagine him drooling over the wrap he’s just ordered, and as the faux-Punk food assistant person makes eyes back at the pubescent adolescent, which if you think about it really does make her a Punk of the most faux kind because if you had an ounce of Punk sensibility you’d be unlikely to want to work in McD’s in the first instance, and even if you did you certainly wouldn’t participate in your own self-objectification where you’re kind of putting yourself on the same level, metaphorically speaking, as a Big Flavour Wrap.

It is irksome because someone has chosen money over self-respect. Selling a Punk song that was written and performed by a band that had credibility and which was aware of its working class heritage is unforgivable – some things are worth more than money, or at least they should be. You can make a crappy McD’s advert with any piece of crappy music that is spewed out of the pop music machine – The Buzzcocks are not of that ilk, yet decades of resistance have been compromised with one foolish decision where money takes centre stage. And yes, I know that sounds naïve and a tad Romantic, but that’s how things should be. It is distressing to hear of this song, and even The Jam’s That’s Entertainment, being used in a way that is wholly incompatible with their angry-youth origins. And I’m not the only one to think so. Morrissey is also pissed. And so we should be. Not just because we’re both plant-eating liberal humanists (not actually sure if Morrissey is but I’d like to believe he’s that way inclined), but because money cannot be allowed to corrupt every single thing of worth – because if we allow that to happen, how do we place true and meaningful value on anything?

Click the links and tell me if you think these songs are worthy of such misappropriation. Go on – I dare you.


Dismalandic

It does make you wonder what was the inspiration behind the temporary art project, Dismaland…

It’s kind of hard to think…

Oh, yeah…


Thoughts on Money Inspired by Russell Brand’s Revolution

6a00d83451ebab69e200e54f8a42248833-800wi

Chapter 8 of Revolution sees Russell Brand address one of my favourite topics: money as fallacy. It is heartening to hear another speak of this as I spend a lot of time bemused at the fact that so few people think this way. At a recent party (I am not a party-goer, but the host of this particular party, and her family, are so very nice that whenever they extend an invitation I am inclined to accept) I spent a good amount of time talking to someone who didn’t recoil at my suggestion that money is in no way real (most of the people I have tried to have a conversation with have actually, physically recoiled, leaving me feeling that I’m wasting my time pursuing such thoughts with them). What is it about money, and our present ‘global economy,’ that people have such a hard time debunking in their heads? Is it that people don’t question where money came from as an ideological tool (of whatever)? Or is it that we, as a society (speaking Western-industrialized here, but this can extend to many others), spend way too much time and energy, in fact some people do little else, trying to chase down every coin and note (and electronic versions of these) they can lay their hands on? Whatever the reason(s), the only way that money’s dominance will diminish over time is by sparking conversation now. To that end, why not start by asking yourself how the world would look without money (or a monetary system like the one we operate under (an ominous thought in itself, operating ‘under’ money))?


Action, of sorts, Inspired by Russell Brand’s Message of Revolution

Whilst emptying my email inbox I came across this, as yet, unanswered email sent to Russell Brand, via his management team, in late 2013 – funny how people can confuse my surname with my given name.

308C7C39965CDD347A5F5659172588_h498_w598_m2-620x350

Dear Alexander,

Thanks for your email which I have forward to Russell’s office in the US.

Best
Moira

From: “Alexander, Matthew”
Date: Thursday, 24 October 2013 16:24
To: Moira Bellas
Subject: Russell Brand’s Revolution

Dear Ms Bellas,

I hope that this email will eventually find its way to Russell Brand. I watched with interest the interview that Jeremy Paxman conducted on Newsnight (23rd October 2013) and felt compelled to write to Mr Brand. I do hope that this is not a nuisance to you. The address to Mr Brand is typed below.

Yours sincerely,

Matthew Alexander

 

Dear Mr Brand,

It is refreshing to hear someone of your stature calling for revolution. The interview that Jeremy Paxman conducted was poor (on his behalf) in that his own ignorance and complicity with the present system is all too obvious, and certainly does not represent impartial journalism. Paxman is more at home dealing with ‘buffoons’ like Boris Johnson, a man who is in no way stupid judging by the expense of his education but who is content to ‘act the fool’ because this deflects criticism away from him and his right-wing views. Buffoons like Johnson allow Paxman to ‘play’ at being the serious interviewer. It is no wonder that people ‘glaze over’ and show a lack of interest in politics when Boris Johnson is considered a serious politician, or indeed worthy of the title of Mayor of London.

There is the potential to mobilise the revolutionary message in a way that has never before been possible through the use of social networking and other tools of mass popular culture. The apathy of the people, with regard to present day politics, is connected to the disdain that is shown to them by those career politicians who are more interested in their own concerns than in the concerns of the people they are elected to represent. I see the way forward as a ‘re-imagining’ of politics rather than a revolution, which is a loaded word and offers many an example of past failures with which detractors will then undoubtedly use for their own ends. A re-imagining offers hope of something different, and I think that was the message you were communicating last night.

Paxman’s insistence at putting you on the spot in order to get a handle on the mechanics of the re-imagining is a tactic designed to debunk your message and I thought you negotiated this well – and this is what gives me hope of a new beginning, because people like you who can defend themselves with words and who can deflect the all-too-simple tactic of ‘bash the utopian’ are a thorn in the side of the established order: you are a thorn. It is impossible to think that anyone has all the answers at this stage, as you rightly commented. What is likely to follow is difficulty and hardship, but one that is likely to lead to a better future for humankind – and surely that must be the sole aim of this re-imagining.

I detest poverty. I detest war. I detest hatred and violence. I believe in humanism, where harmony promotes love and understanding. This must be a peaceful re-imagining, a re-imagining that has at its fore the desire to end wrongdoing and unfairness. Money is fallacy. The desire for money, and the accumulation of it, is divisive. There is no need for anyone to be poor when money is viewed in this way. I believe that a vital part of the re-imagining of world politics is to promote the ‘money is fallacy’ message. Without drawing attention to this, money is afforded an almost preternatural status where its very existence is never questioned; and this means that the poor, the starving, the fearful, and the vulnerable remain just that.

If you can continue to use your celebrity status, and that of your acquaintances, to promote the idea of a need for change then I believe there will be a mass ‘awakening;’ but the message must be repetitive and strong from the start, for far too many people are content to numb their minds to the ills of the world via whatever means necessary. I am nobody and no-one, but I am happy to spread the word by whatever means available to me. I come from a poor, working-class background and believe in a better future for all. I hope that these words are passed on to you as I am excited by the prospect of political theorising that has the potential to change lives – and I’m sure there are many of us.

Thank you for the hope you give to humankind.

Yours sincerely,

Matthew Alexander


Some Russell Brand Inspired Thoughts… #4 (unfinished stuff around: ‘access to money would surely cut the majority of unethical and illegal behaviour around the world (more on this in a future post)’)

So this is that post, or at least a start on that post.

imagebot-29

What happens to all the ‘criminals’ in the post-revolution period? Well, to start thinking about such a question we need first to figure out what type of criminal exists. There’s no room to list them all in categories, etc., so we’ll have to put up with some generalisations, which isn’t great but…

Starting with the biggies of arms, drugs, and trafficking, whether sex related or not (and sex is such a troublesome word to use in connection with ‘trafficking’ but I’m not about to make up brand new terms – that would just be confusing). All of the big three listed here are primarily about money, greed, and exploitation. Take away a monetary system that is heavily weighted in favour of sociopaths, and what reasons are left to pursue such trades? None. Give such sociopaths access to as much money as they wish to have and watch as they stop dealing in arms, drugs, and people.

Move down the chain to those who steal things, whether corporate billions or TVs from houses. Do the same here and what motivation is there to continue stealing? None.

Now it’s the turn of the violent. A tricky one, full of complications that surely depend upon one’s sensibilities, but think of how violence is rarely a matter of pure violence but is connected with feelings of power over others, past history, cultural context, so many things that it would be hard to list them all. Think again of how less stressful life would be without the worry of monetary gain/loss. Think also of how those who feel they have nothing left to lose, or have lost everything important to them in the first instance, and consider the extreme acts they will commit, which rarely stack up in terms of common sense, because these are the only things they have any control over. To fuel their sense of power they may injure, kill, harm, and perform acts of cruelty and torture.[1] Remove their need to exert ‘power’ in such ways, by removing the problems associated with feeling ‘powerless’ within a system such as our present monetary system based on capitalist principles, and the vast majority will not choose violence as a result. For the minority who will, well that’s another thing to consider, but it will indeed be a minority.

[1] For a study of the human character in the form of a novel, heavily influenced by his own experiences, see Fyodor Dostoyevsky’s The House of the Dead, available for free at Project Gutenburg.


Some Russell Brand Inspired Thoughts… #4

What might a new system look like? There’s no harm in speculating, so here goes.

rs_634x833-131016135028-634-newstatesman-russell-brand.ls.101613_copy

For those obsessed with the capitalist model and fearful of how things might pan out if widespread revolution takes hold, here’s an interesting alternative, potentially:

Given that money is a construct, not naturally occurring, but that lots of people do not see it as such, and therefore cannot imagine life without money/finance/transactions and so on, how about a revolution where money is available to all – as available to the homeless, the starving, the young, the old, just basically no restrictions where access to it is concerned? Such access to money would surely cut the majority of unethical and illegal behaviour around the world (more on this in a future post), and would continue to placate those who love the fallacy of a monetary system, so everyone wins, when you think about it.

Those who like to work can continue to work, and let’s face it, work does provide a certain routine that can be useful – if anyone reading this has ever had occasion to claim benefits for an extended period, or knows someone who does, you’ll know how miserable, repetitive (but not in a good way), monotonous life can be without a ‘purpose.’ And of course, jobs would still need to be done following a revolution, I mean we all need to eat, and sanitation is a good idea, but there would be greater emphasis on ethical ideas following such a revolution because when it’s not all about the money (and the possession of it, leading to hatred, war, famine, disease, etc.), the greatest ideas can take hold, using human potential for way better things than mining Alaska for oil, for instance, or for drilling asteroids and/or comets for diamonds, or for hoarding huge stocks of food in one part of the world whilst on the other side of the world millions starve to death. But anyway, the point is that for those fearful of revolution (and surely none of us wants the violence associated with The Glorious Revolution, or The American Revolution, or The French Revolution, or The Russian Revolution, or The Chinese Revolution, you get the point here?) the actual act of revolution does not need to be/look/seem so different from what happens in the world presently. But first we must just stop and consider for a moment how obscene it is that hundreds of thousands of people will, today and everyday most likely, be spending money in shopping malls buying stuff they really don’t need, when they stop and analyse things, whilst millions starve, die, are mistreated by others, kill each other with weapons of hate. Remove money from the equation, and this is ‘money’ that is not available to all, and many problems disappear.

So there’s a brief, of the top of the head type suggestion, inspired by Russell Brand’s Revolution.


%d bloggers like this: