'Zine review: Terror Incognita
I asked Moxie for a list of things he's read that have haunted him. I'm now reading through these.
The request came from a concern that with our increasingly niche'd and targeted markets and dwindling attention spans, we can get into a weird groupthink situation with ourselves. I only seek out content that appeals to my current interests. Retailers, google, etc are more than happy to quickly introduce me to more of the same. This can make it really tricky to broaden one's perspective, particularly outside of an educational environment where you are compelled to read (or skim) some things you would not have picked up if left to your own devices.
My brother confronted the bugged form of this phenomenon when he bought me a 3 wolves moon shirt as a gift. His Amazon feed became over-run with similar ironic reviews for other products he had no interest in acquiring. I wonder how much we get wrapped in advertising we're actually interested in and begin to think that the whole world is running Ragnars, contemplating steampunk boots from Zappos or a camo bikini top from SwimOutlet without actually realizing it. The ads follow you!
At any rate, MacGyver played Moxie's Hold Fast documentary about his adventures salvaging a pretty dingy dinghy and cruising it around various ports of call... He's also a pretty respected hacker/info sec dude, so I would rate him as an "interesting person." Who happens to be of an anarchist bent.
One of the things he suggested was a free to download Zine from CrimethInc. Terror Incognita.
True to form, this was one of the more challenging things I've hunkered down to read in a while.
Some points the writers made resonated with me....
There are some facets of our world that we were not asked explicit permission to participate in, we were born into (i.e. we can vote, but we were never asked if we wanted to create a society which chooses its leaders through the process of voting).
These norms which we take for granted probably do color our world view and beliefs in ways we cannot really appreciate unless we find a way to become outsiders to our own culture.
Yes, there are spontaneous circumstances where if you had asked my consent to do something beforehand, I would have said no, but in retrospect, I am glad that we did that. On brief reflection, it would seem there is usually a seductive element to how we undertook that adventure. Maybe we did it because of a charismatic ring leader (he/she's sexy), or because we thought doing so would rebrand ourselves as the sort of person who does edgy things (I want to appear sexy), or some other reason in a similar vein.
OK, fine, there is some power at taking a long hard look and possibly poking the things you find scary, the people you find detestable. This could be a clue to what you dislike about yourself, what (unnecessary?) limitations the norms your culture has imposed, etc. In short, scaring yourself at regular intervals is probably good for your personal growth.
But then the writers lost me on a bunch of other arguments in their thesis...
I don't think smashing windows creates the change we want to see in this world. Maybe that makes me a conformist. Maybe there is an irony to saying consumerist culture is ruining our environment and then going out on a shopping spree at a green washed store. But I think there is also an irony to destroying the precious resources we have (not even we-- strangers who happen to be close to where we are rioting-- have) to make similar points, or to terrify by making no coherent point at all? The authors make a comment about a failed attempt to convert a pride parade into a riot in boystown of Chicago. They failed to be seductive. Dude, I lived in that neighborhood-- the gay community put a lot of effort into making it look distinctive and feel safe. Of course the residents are going to right your overturned trashcans and stay your hand if you try to smash their windows or spraypaint their fabulous rainbow colored fire hydrants while you are "participating" in their parade.
I don't think we need to delve into the queer movement and how its definition has evolved over time and with different users to start to understand anarchy. This just seemed like the writers trying to resign the gay facets of themselves with the anarchist facets of themselves (and possibly work in a humblebrag about how often they get laid at riots).
The same goes for their tiresome allusions to Foucault, Marx, and Hobbes-- I felt like I was trapped in a University of Chicago lit review of great social thinkers but with a superficial treatment from 10,000 feet. Either you are going to write a (very dry) essay about how anarchy fits within [insert social classic here]'s framework for the nerdy set, or you are going to explain it like I'm five for the attention-starved proletariat. Trying to do both accomplishes neither besides making me suspect that you are a naive early 20's liberal arts grad with limited life experience hiding behind big words and name dropping to discourage anyone from disagreeing with you. But I digress.
In short, I agree with about 33% of what the authors are saying, but it was still worth a read to stretch my comfort zone.
The request came from a concern that with our increasingly niche'd and targeted markets and dwindling attention spans, we can get into a weird groupthink situation with ourselves. I only seek out content that appeals to my current interests. Retailers, google, etc are more than happy to quickly introduce me to more of the same. This can make it really tricky to broaden one's perspective, particularly outside of an educational environment where you are compelled to read (or skim) some things you would not have picked up if left to your own devices.
My brother confronted the bugged form of this phenomenon when he bought me a 3 wolves moon shirt as a gift. His Amazon feed became over-run with similar ironic reviews for other products he had no interest in acquiring. I wonder how much we get wrapped in advertising we're actually interested in and begin to think that the whole world is running Ragnars, contemplating steampunk boots from Zappos or a camo bikini top from SwimOutlet without actually realizing it. The ads follow you!
At any rate, MacGyver played Moxie's Hold Fast documentary about his adventures salvaging a pretty dingy dinghy and cruising it around various ports of call... He's also a pretty respected hacker/info sec dude, so I would rate him as an "interesting person." Who happens to be of an anarchist bent.
One of the things he suggested was a free to download Zine from CrimethInc. Terror Incognita.
True to form, this was one of the more challenging things I've hunkered down to read in a while.
Some points the writers made resonated with me....
There are some facets of our world that we were not asked explicit permission to participate in, we were born into (i.e. we can vote, but we were never asked if we wanted to create a society which chooses its leaders through the process of voting).
These norms which we take for granted probably do color our world view and beliefs in ways we cannot really appreciate unless we find a way to become outsiders to our own culture.
Yes, there are spontaneous circumstances where if you had asked my consent to do something beforehand, I would have said no, but in retrospect, I am glad that we did that. On brief reflection, it would seem there is usually a seductive element to how we undertook that adventure. Maybe we did it because of a charismatic ring leader (he/she's sexy), or because we thought doing so would rebrand ourselves as the sort of person who does edgy things (I want to appear sexy), or some other reason in a similar vein.
OK, fine, there is some power at taking a long hard look and possibly poking the things you find scary, the people you find detestable. This could be a clue to what you dislike about yourself, what (unnecessary?) limitations the norms your culture has imposed, etc. In short, scaring yourself at regular intervals is probably good for your personal growth.
But then the writers lost me on a bunch of other arguments in their thesis...
I don't think smashing windows creates the change we want to see in this world. Maybe that makes me a conformist. Maybe there is an irony to saying consumerist culture is ruining our environment and then going out on a shopping spree at a green washed store. But I think there is also an irony to destroying the precious resources we have (not even we-- strangers who happen to be close to where we are rioting-- have) to make similar points, or to terrify by making no coherent point at all? The authors make a comment about a failed attempt to convert a pride parade into a riot in boystown of Chicago. They failed to be seductive. Dude, I lived in that neighborhood-- the gay community put a lot of effort into making it look distinctive and feel safe. Of course the residents are going to right your overturned trashcans and stay your hand if you try to smash their windows or spraypaint their fabulous rainbow colored fire hydrants while you are "participating" in their parade.
I don't think we need to delve into the queer movement and how its definition has evolved over time and with different users to start to understand anarchy. This just seemed like the writers trying to resign the gay facets of themselves with the anarchist facets of themselves (and possibly work in a humblebrag about how often they get laid at riots).
The same goes for their tiresome allusions to Foucault, Marx, and Hobbes-- I felt like I was trapped in a University of Chicago lit review of great social thinkers but with a superficial treatment from 10,000 feet. Either you are going to write a (very dry) essay about how anarchy fits within [insert social classic here]'s framework for the nerdy set, or you are going to explain it like I'm five for the attention-starved proletariat. Trying to do both accomplishes neither besides making me suspect that you are a naive early 20's liberal arts grad with limited life experience hiding behind big words and name dropping to discourage anyone from disagreeing with you. But I digress.
In short, I agree with about 33% of what the authors are saying, but it was still worth a read to stretch my comfort zone.
posted by Bellepic at
6:28 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home