August 4, 2025 • 37 mins
Andrew is joined by James to discuss the history and efficacy of anti militarism and anti-war movements.
Sources:
Anarchist Encyclopedia by Sebastien Faure et al
https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/james-herod-the-weakness-of-a-politics-of-protest
https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/jeff-shantz-p-j-lilley-striking-against-the-work-war-machine
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:01):
All the media, Hello, and welcome to it could happen here.
I'm Andrew Siege as soon as andrewism on YouTube, and
I'm here with it's James, And honestly I shouldn't see
welcome to it could happen. Yeah, I should really see
welcome to it is happening here, because I mean, just
(00:22):
just a second with you, James, how are you doing?
Speaker 2 (00:24):
You're safe?
Speaker 3 (00:25):
I'm okay, yeah, I'm safe right now. We are living
through wild times in the United States. Every day is
a new hell.
Speaker 1 (00:36):
Indeed, indeed, and although I'm not in the US, the
flames of that hell definitely lick the rest of the world.
Speaker 2 (00:42):
In weis big as tomorrow.
Speaker 3 (00:43):
Yeah, they definitely do. I was just talking to people
in Syria yesterday and like the alavis Ala white when
everyone call our levies, if you want to say it,
are facing quite substantial persecution currently and like one of
the larger refugee accepting countries in the world isn't doing
that anymore unless you're a white South African of course,
and like that has these massive trickle down effects for everywhere.
(01:08):
It's just one example of how America so goes, the
US so goes, the world.
Speaker 1 (01:12):
You know, indeed, indeed, and not just in Syria, are
the flavors of conflict tearing up with the part I
think most people I now know what the situation in Palestine,
the way that Israel was carrying on to genocide there.
You know, the Russia's invasion of Ukraine, the civil war
in Myanmar, in Sudan, the you know, struggle between India
(01:34):
and Pakistan over Kashmir and the kashmir people who are
you know, left on the on the wayside. You know,
the Tamil genocide yep, taking place in in Sri Lanka.
I mean, there's so many things happening across the world
right now, it's really difficult.
Speaker 2 (01:53):
To keep up.
Speaker 3 (01:55):
Yeah. The friends in Meanma would prefer the framing of
revolution to civil war. They're pretty explicit about that.
Speaker 1 (02:03):
Okay, Yeah, you're right, you're right, you're right, I should
be using that terminology.
Speaker 3 (02:08):
Yeah, it's not appropriate everywhere, but in their case, there
has been a civil war since forty eight, and it's
a substantial change with the twenty twenty one revolution.
Speaker 1 (02:16):
Right, right, right, right, Yeah, thank you for that correction. Yeah, yeah,
of course, I think now is a really good time
to have a general almost strategic discussion on anti war struggle.
And so today I really want to look at how
we can come to the propaganda around war, the actions
that are possible to take against militarism at home, and
(02:38):
how we can build solidarity across.
Speaker 2 (02:40):
Oceans and borders.
Speaker 1 (02:42):
Yeah, so to understand how to actually against war, we
first need to agitate against militarism.
Speaker 2 (02:48):
And fosse who don't know.
Speaker 1 (02:49):
Militarism is the belief or policy that the nation should
maintain a strong military and we prepare to use it
aggressively to defend or promote its interests. That involves glorifying
military vish use and ideals and prioritizing military strength and
readiness above other aspects of society. So it's a basic
Google definition. My copy of the Anarchist Encyclopedia is the
(03:12):
English version, which is aberged sadly, but the original French
has the full unabridged Anarchist Encyclopedia. So with a bit
of shaky online translation magic and managed to pull its
definition of militarism as well. Miltarism is a system that
consists of having and maintaining military personnel. It's essential and
avolt goal is a preparation for war, the recruitment of
(03:33):
a standing army, in the organization of the cajuris of
reserve army, the accumulation, the putting in place, the maintenance
in a state of service of ever more modern, more
perfected war material. In short, it is the preliminary organization
of war. What are the implications of that, Well, all
over the world I think we can see, you know,
the consequences of statism, the might makes right, pursuit of conquest,
(03:58):
the fighting wars abroad at home for the strategic interests,
ideological commitments, resource claims, whatever the case may be. The
rivalries within the rule in class, and how that pleas out,
and how it's that that blows back on all of
our faces, you know, the profits the military industrial complex
which keeps this whole system chewing on, you know, the
(04:20):
blood of innocence, of course, the longstanding consequences and continued
work of colonialism. And of course, the way is that
militarism gets turned inward with this suppression of strikes, of activism,
of popular unrest. When the now militarized police aren't enough,
they often bring in the military itself and reports with
(04:43):
militarism you also have the narrative component, you know, the
building of patriotism that so plans the seed of fascism.
States can survive without military is true. The state typically
to ends upon some effort or some attempt at monopoly
(05:05):
on the legitimate use of violence within the territory by
some definitions. But the states which do not have militaries
often can do so because they've outsourced their military functions
to another state, and or because they have other systems
in place to control descent, to develop a certain degree
of social condition and pacify the population.
Speaker 3 (05:29):
I'm just trying to think of states of the militaries,
like in my experience, I guess you have like the
Panama right, doesn't have a military. It has the Center Front,
which are like the frontier protection, I guess, but essentially
like a militarized border patrol. And they do have marines
and stuff as well, I guess, so they kind of
do have a military, but it's a kind of a
renaming exercise more than anything.
Speaker 1 (05:49):
Indeed, the same thing of having a militarized police, but
it's not a military technically, yeah, or having a militarized
coast guard and it's not a military technically you.
Speaker 3 (05:57):
Know, yeah, yeah, you have the countries they republic the
Marshall Islands, which just outsources its its militarization to the
United States, right like the US. Well, I think that
is a distinct thing. People in the Marshall Islands have
seen the horrors of war very closely and also the
dangers of militarization, right like, the United States nuked the
(06:21):
Marshall Islands a country with which it had no quarrel
with which it was not at war, just to practice
in case it needed to innuk a country with which
it did have a quarrel. I guess the legacy of
that is very obvious and continues to this day there.
But if marshal Ly's people wish to join a military,
they can join the US military, and the US guarantees
their security and theory that it's it's yeah, it is
(06:41):
a distinct. For instance, if you joined the US military
in the Marshall Islands wish to access your veterans benefits,
the easiest way to do so is take a five
hour flight to Hawaii. Like, they don't have any any
any benefits for actual veterans there, So I guess in
that case, like maybe it does give people a different
relationship to like state violent.
Speaker 1 (07:01):
Yeah, it's I mean obviously different places to have different
histories as to how they came to those arrangements. But
you definitely see a relationship between colonialism and the outsourcing
of military functions.
Speaker 3 (07:16):
Yeah, definitely.
Speaker 1 (07:18):
Now, historically anarchists have been anti militarists. The encyclopedias call
this aspect of the anarchist struggle. The aim to disqualifying militarism,
to denounce it's terrible and painful consequences, to combat the
warlike and bar expert, distigmatize and dishonor war, to abolish
(07:38):
the regime of the armies. So abolition militarism looks like
material relief from the oppression military violence, the redirection of
resources that go toward military toward instead things that actually
benefit the lives of everyday people, you know, the reduction
(07:59):
of pain and suffering throughout the world, the abolition of borders,
which so often are the motivating force behind military exercise.
And while no anarki so deny that armed strugglers necessary
for defense, it's not the same as having an imperialistic
or hierarchical ambition towards you know, power, over towards dominating
(08:22):
our populations of people.
Speaker 3 (08:24):
Yeah, this reminds me of the discussion that happened in
the CNT and Spain in the nineteen thirties previous to
the Civil War, even before that, right where they there
was a very profound and obvious discussion on how to
defend their evolution, how to defend communities whilst maintaining anti militarism.
(08:47):
And that's why we didn't see like that was not
a like standing army. Beyond you had affinity groups, right,
and then you had like defense committees of six six
to eight people, and those people like took on the
role of organizing for a potential violent like in order
(09:07):
to defend the community, right, like to use violence to
defend the community against violence. But even as it became
clearer and clearer that Spain was like spiraling towards conflict,
they resisted the idea of establishing and I think more
militarized than that.
Speaker 1 (09:21):
Yeah, And I think so what it's been a really
good place to look at first way, some experiments or
efforts or ideas would have played out, Strategies would have
played out, and I think it's really important to take
those experiments and see how we can iterate on them. Yeah,
and build upon them, because I mean what I've always
admired that we've carried on this anti militarist torch. It's
(09:45):
very important to remember the landscape US changed from war
times past. You know, we're not in World War times anymore. Yes,
you know, the strategies and the discussions and the approaches
that may have worked back then, it doesn't work.
Speaker 2 (10:01):
In the same way now.
Speaker 1 (10:02):
You don't even have to declare war officially anymore. In
this day and age. You can just say that, oh,
you're doing a special military operation, or you can just
send billions of dollars of aid to a country that
you want to support, and even troops to the countries
want to support, and technically you have un declared warrior.
Speaker 2 (10:24):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (10:25):
And you know, not only that, you also get to
unleash generational trauma and poison upon generations of people. But
it's okay because you're going after some terrorists. You know,
you just get to push money and supplies towards this
camp or that, and whether the US is concerned and
at least used to have to seek congressional approval, but
(10:50):
as we see, that's not really a thing. Now, especially
post nine eleven. You know, back in the day, people
thought putting pressure on the elected officials through protest for
being a and you know, there's a the b to
be had to the extent to which that worked for
situations like the Vietamo. But as we've seen with this
song and Dance again and again and again, the protests
(11:11):
are not hitting like they used to. You know, the
response to the protest has been so it's routine at
this point. You know, you just send the police to
bash some heads in or a bat to get the
military because the movers and the shakers on the people
who can actually be reached with these protests, you know,
and no matter how peaceful we proclaim our protests to be,
(11:32):
we're talking about moneyed interests here, you know, a military
industrial complex that has to have line go up. You
know who who doesn't have to give a damn about
some people walking on the road. You know, the system
has grown since the nineteen tens, the nineteen fourteen is
it has grown in such size and complexity to the
point where you know, you don't have to care necessarily
(11:55):
about a single movement, but about a single action and
a protest.
Speaker 3 (11:59):
Yeah, and the two kind of combine and like what
we're seeing in the United Kingdom right now, right like
there's the complete dismissal of protests and this like I'm
thinking a better word than imprecise, but like the vagueness
of the definition of terrorism has allowed the government of
the United Kingdom, in combination with the absence of a
Bill of Rights in the United Kingdom, right to just
(12:20):
be like, oh, Palestine Action and terrorists like you are
the same as the Islamic State because Palestine Action undertook
it in non violent direct action, right, But it's ludicrous
to suggest that that that was terrorism and that it
doesn't mean any reasonable definition of the term. But yet
we're in a stage now where governments can declare anyone
(12:42):
the enemy without any particular oversight. And that's the logical
conclusion of two decades of this.
Speaker 1 (12:48):
Yeah, I mean, to an extent, that has always been
the case. I think what's different now is that they're
not even really attempting to hide behind any sort of
consistent principles or consistent standards, you know, because even back
back then, you know, the artists are being called terrorists
and being mm hmm true, you know, chastised for that.
Speaker 3 (13:08):
Yeah, I guess also, like our class system is more
entrenched than it ever has been in a sense, I'm
just thinking, like, wars are not fought by the mass
of middle class. And like the people who become senators
for the most part, right, I mean, in the US
of Downs, senators will have done military service. It can
(13:30):
sort of boost their career opportunities. I get that, But
like it is not for the most part, the sons
of the of the people who who start the wars
who die in the wars. Right, it's indeed people of
a different class in a way that even in a
distinct way from the era of the World wars, right
when and when large numbers of people of the middle class,
(13:54):
especially maybe not the very privileged people that like did
die in those wars. And I think like the memory
of the First World War probably did have some impact
on like the reticence of some politicians to dive into
the second one. But we don't really have that now.
Speaker 1 (14:11):
Indeed, so we criticize this particular approach of the protest
and I know that the inevitable question is, so what
can we even do at this point? And you know
(14:32):
this is why I consider it very important to take
a step back and look at what is actually keeping
the system going right, and what's keeping the system going
is and it's always been labor. Right, not to say
that labor and labor struggles to be all and all
of our politics, but it is to say that if
(14:52):
we want to make a significant impact, that is what
we have the greatest control over our labor. And so
when I talk about things we can do to affect change,
I always had to take it back to the ongoing
process of social revolution. The things you do to oppose
and of things you do to propose, you know, on
(15:14):
the opposing side of things, that includes counter messaging. You know,
even though we may not have the resources of mainstream
media or government communications, we have weight of mouth, we
have trust between ourselves, and we have alternative media that
can be, especially in this day and age, just as
powerful if sparked right, Especially considering the fact that the
(15:37):
general sentiment, the populist sentiment, has, whether coming from a
leftist direction or a right dist direction, the general sentiment
has been moving toward anti establishment politics. The anti establishment
sort of momentum is what's growing right now. And the
(15:58):
issue of course being that sometimes that anti established and
momentum can be hijacked, such as what Trump did you
know to get himself elected the first time he rode
that wave and you know, this whole Epstein situation, we
may see that foundation of his base potentially crumbling.
Speaker 2 (16:17):
A part of it.
Speaker 1 (16:18):
But we have to look at what is actually motivating
people right now and how they can be reached. An
alternative media with an anti establishment message message is I
think one of the better ways to do so. Yeah,
you know, wherever you see it, it needs to be
out there, you know, on social media or through other
avenues calling out the ridiculous Cassius bellies used to manufacture
(16:43):
consent for you know, to be wary of potential forced
flags can be used as a justification for military action
to consistently poor calls in the narratives that have allowed
you know, nationalists and and xenophobic sentiments to become the
force that they have become today. And of course even
(17:05):
engaged in that messaging. Of course, try not to let
campus on infect your counter message in either. Yeah, you know,
that's how you get people who are you know, they gung,
who are about a free Palestine, and then they start when
they ask them about Ukraine all of a sudden, it's
actually really complicated. It's actually the fault of the US
and the EU and need to and not Russia, even
(17:28):
though Russia is the one who actually invaded and is
actively killing people and this strial infra short as we speak. Yeah, right,
I mean there's conversation to be had about the US
and what's the EU, and about NATO obviously, but it's
very clear.
Speaker 3 (17:43):
Yeah, it's very uncomplicated.
Speaker 1 (17:45):
Who's actually killing people right now?
Speaker 3 (17:47):
You know. Yeah, there is one country which is taking
the children right and trying to like re educate them
give them to families, in Russia, which is committing murders
of civilians. Like, we don't have to resort to like
ten year geopolitical trajectories to say that it's wrong and
it should be opposed exactly exactly.
Speaker 1 (18:10):
And also I want to make this point about counter
messaging because it's a consistent gripe I've had, In fact,
one of the main reasons I started my channel in
the first place. With your comment message in whether it's
in person or on the Internet or wherever, don't stay
perpetually on the back foot, you know, the words, don't
just counter message. Yeah, you know right now, and it's
(18:33):
what irritates me so much. The right wing sets the conversation. Yeah,
you know, you have people they say, oh, we want
to talk about critical race theory, and then everybody's talking
about critical rais theory because they talk to where they
want to target trans people, and all of a sudden
we have to scrabble to respond to all their erroneous
and ridiculous claims about trans people. Yeah, that comment message
(18:56):
is an important, is important, but it cannot be all
that we do, right Yeah, and this is a bit
how to that feel. But you know, of course I'm
not the one who is partiality liketoral approaches. But you
can see some of that not just counter message in
but also actively messaging taking place with Zora Mum Danny's strategy. Yeah,
(19:20):
you know, when you look at how he speaks, how
he addresses some of.
Speaker 2 (19:23):
The badly the doarguments are made against him.
Speaker 1 (19:26):
His rhetorical strength and popularity in part lies on his
refusal to carry on the conversation on the enemies too,
you know, so they will go at him for something
and he's going to spit it right back around to
talking about the things that it's just really master to
people to set the conversation to get people to respond
to that, because all other responses toward him have been
(19:48):
trying to distract from his actual message in and his
ability to steal on message is something I find really admirable,
despite you know, my concerns about the vestment of energy
and electoral strategies.
Speaker 3 (20:02):
Sure, yeah, yeah, yeah, there are certain things we can
admire about those people if we don't agree with everything.
And I do think like in that sense something I
think about a lot with like messaging and countermessaging, especially
around war. It's like I've spent some time in the
Anes and what people call Java, and like one of
(20:25):
the framings that I've consistently seen, and it's mostly in
like the Libleaning mass media, I guess, is that people
went to Rajaba to fight against Is or Dash or Isis,
whatever you want to call it, right, and like in
doing so, that is how the revolutionary Jarba is not
understood by most people, right, and they have taken the
(20:47):
power away from it in their framing of it, because
people didn't just go. Some people did go justify I
right that there they went because they saw what I
was doing. They understood its inhumane and they wanted that
to stop, and that's admirable. But people also went because
they saw what people were building in Rajava and they
thought that was beautiful and they wanted to defend it,
(21:08):
and that's admirable too. And sometimes the messaging around specifically
ra Java, Mia and Mar to an extent right their
international volunteers there too, and of course that like folks
from the AMMA who have picked up weapons who never
thought they would, and they didn't just do it to
oppose the hunter. They did it because like in there,
despite all the horrible things about war then and like
(21:31):
it should be avoided at all costs. In the conflict,
they have built liberated spaces and they've experienced freedom and
they have experienced how that feels, and they've built a
revolution that is beautiful in spite of the war, not
because of it, and they want to defend that. And
I think that's a messaging that we should we should consider, right,
(21:55):
because the messaging that everything has to be against something
bad always sort of it presupposes so that there can't
have been something good, and in some cases there has
been something good, and like we won't fully understand what
was happening there unless we understand that, and I think
we should push back on that messaging what we see it,
(22:17):
especially in the great legacy media.
Speaker 1 (22:20):
Absolutely, absolutely, and that really connects to the you know,
the other aspect of the social revolution paradigm, because it's
not just about opposing and so it's proposing that that's
something different. Yeah, and that is often far more energizing
and then simply talking about everything that's wrong.
Speaker 2 (22:40):
With the world. Yeah, definitely.
Speaker 1 (22:43):
And I think also for those who maybe have concerns
about the risks of oppositional messaging, there's another area where
you can direct your energy to support the opposition without
necessarily actively being involved in it, you know, because it's
not enough to just oppose the system. You have to
build something else, and you could be part of that
(23:04):
building something else, you know, swim a message and you
want to be able to readirect people's energies to the
actual frustrations and interests, you know, to re center the
conflicting the lens on the actual divisions of society, such
as class, to make moneyed interests known. And you know,
even though it's never been easy to be anti war,
(23:26):
you know, especially in the center of empire, and in
many ways technologies is today have empowered much greater repression.
You know, in Russia, individual and mass protests are met
with severe oppression, massive finds, geo sentences, et cetera. In
the US you can face police brutality, censorship, even deportation.
And in Israel, I haven't seen or heard anything from
(23:51):
the Israeli populus in terms of resisting what Israel is
doing to the Palestinians. But I know that those who
do stand against the mandatory conscription do face jail time
for their refusal. So it's not easy to be anti war,
especially in militarized and empire building territories. I get that
(24:12):
stress and that worry that opposition is still necessary, but
there's other things.
Speaker 2 (24:17):
But we can we do it than just messaging.
Speaker 1 (24:19):
Yeah, you know, there are things that take on less risk,
such as building an alternative, and there are things that
take on more risk. Now protests, even peaceful protests, are
no longer risk free, endeavers. And I know when most
people hear what you know, we need to push back,
they hear, okay, let's organize a protest. Honestly, we could
(24:41):
use a bit more imagination in this day and age,
Like I said, the protest is not hitting like it
used to. It's become like a pressure valve or a
tool of path it that could be tolerated for a
(25:02):
time and then met with repression the moment it's time
to wrap it up. And they have a couple of
reasons why protests are not you know, able to do
as much. You know, they have the moneyed interests. You know,
they can end up being divided according to various arguments
of a strategy. And I'm sorry to say this, but
protests as of late it haven't accomplished very much besides
(25:27):
getting people mutilated or jailed or worse in the past
few years. And in fact, a lot of the resources
that could be spent you know, building alternatives are being
spent instead on you know, paying people's bonds and getting
people out of jail, prison relief, that sort of thing.
Not to say those things are not necessary, you know,
don't don't leave your comrades to trot and jail. But
(25:50):
I think we need to consider the free data that
we've basically been giving away to through laying class in
the form of pictures, names, addresses, identifying data that they
can be used to repress or just erupt or infiltrate
protesters and protesting organizations down the line, as James Herod
(26:12):
and s another James. As James Herod wrote in the
Weakness of our politics of protest, we have been getting
some of these critiques of protests from He says, thus,
instead of powerfully concentrate in our mental and physical energies
on solving this problem, to eliminate this obstacle to defeating capitalism,
(26:32):
we are taking to the streets once again merely protested,
merely incasion of what is basically mindless activism. Later, he says,
it's easy to agree on what to protest against. The
list of things that needs to be stopped on the
capitalism is long, so long, in fact, we don't even.
Speaker 2 (26:48):
Need to agree.
Speaker 1 (26:49):
There's plenty to choose from, so just pick something that
suits you. Perhaps this is why I'm meant so many
activists got involved in protesting. It's not so easy, though,
to figure out what we want to replace capitalism with,
to work out convincing arguments about how it will possibly work.
And they set about creating such a social world, especially
since so little energy has been devoted to the task
(27:09):
end quote. And you know, I get why protests are popular.
You know, as he says, it has a low barrier
to entry. You just have to show up. And in
a society that has been so deliberately atomized were mass
collective action as we made so difficult, protests has become
pretty much a very easy avenue to get those things done. Yeah,
(27:31):
and you know, protests can work in Sydney instances for
them and any goals, but I think that those uses
are diminishing day by day in the cost benefits analysis.
Speaker 3 (27:42):
Yeah, I'm just thinking about Like there was a letter
Georgio World wrote to one of his readers on the
subject of anti fascism where all were was lamenting that
the anti fascism that he was encountering in England right
in between his participation in the Spanish Civil War and
the Second World War or was always centered on hate
(28:02):
and like it's sort of an idea. We get the
two Minutes of Hate later in nineteen eighty four, right,
but maybe it comes from here, and like it never
proposed an alternative. It just said it pointed to something.
It said bad, something I've tried not to do in
my journalism. Right, It's very often we do this a
journalists too. We point something and say bad, and we
(28:22):
don't look for the waste that it could become better.
And so like protesting can become such an identity for
people like you see it. I'm just thinking of like
every time I get sent a link to Instagram, right,
which is a platform I don't really participate on, but
I will look at things and they'll be like, oh,
(28:43):
San Diego protest news, san Diego protester, so Cow protester,
and like, I think we should resist that being an
identity because we want to build something beautiful as well
as oppose what is bad. And if we don't have
something beautiful to propose, what do we do out there?
Speaker 2 (29:01):
Exactly? Exactly?
Speaker 1 (29:03):
And you know there's room for protests. I don't want
to give off the impression and that there isn't you know,
But for all the lovely talk about peaceful protests, that
works when there's an actual threat backing up those protests.
You know, you don't just do the peaceful protest. You know,
Gandhi didn't single handedly win India's independence by marching peacefully.
(29:25):
You know, there has to be something back, and it's
up or else It's going to be very easy to ignore.
Speaker 2 (29:28):
And suppress.
Speaker 1 (29:29):
Yeah, and I think that protests should not be our
default right now. They are our default, and I think
they are better uses of all collective time, energy and resources,
even though protests are very easy compared to some of
the things.
Speaker 2 (29:44):
That are more necessary right now.
Speaker 1 (29:46):
You know, but if protest is where you're dead set
on funneling energy, I would just say that you should
at least learn d r S strategies. You know, their
resources online to get some information on that. De arrest strategies,
you can look it up. But if it's possible, if
you see the situation playing out, you know, try not
to sit by and let your comrades get pulled away.
(30:09):
You know, it is very possible the numbers on your
side to prevent the police from harassment targets and taken
away people. You know, there's other stuff you can do
as well besides protests that I keep alluding to, because
you know, sadly the media is no longer you know,
a safe space to share things in depth in some cases.
(30:32):
But just remember that the key is actual disruption. You know,
the media will not be with you, it'll be trying
to manufacture consent on everything that you do. Manufacture consent
against any action taken on the things that you do.
And the only way to counteract that is to maintain
relationships on the ground, to maintain actual local solidarity. Because
(30:52):
once you have those local relationships, in that local solidarity,
there's no amount of things that the media can do
the media could stir up that can vent the people
who see that you're on their side, see that you're
stand up for them.
Speaker 2 (31:04):
To turn a gention. Right.
Speaker 1 (31:06):
What problem happens is when you don't have any relationships,
you don't have any networks, you don't have any community building,
You just doing stuff. The messaging is unclear.
Speaker 2 (31:16):
You know.
Speaker 1 (31:16):
That's where I think the media could really pounce on that.
I would also say, you know, sabotage, you know, hit
their pockets.
Speaker 2 (31:23):
And the main thing.
Speaker 1 (31:25):
The thing that I've been alluded to earlier, is to strike,
you know, to organize strikes to use ther labor power.
Worker's power still comes from a participation in production and
the threat of withdrawing our participation. We have to realize
that in this time we're living in, even the effectiveness
(31:46):
of strikes have come under threat in two ways. The
first way is that the permanence of employment is not
what it used to be. And with the rise and
spread of AI, you know, you have to ask yourself
how long will strike since ITTA in fields be effective anymore.
You know, I have my doubt that EI will ever
(32:08):
reach a point where it can replace people. But honestly,
for a lot of these companies, they don't necessarily care
about whether it's capable of replacing people or not. They
will still try and use it to replace people. So
we have to be cognizant of the fact that this
is the direction they're pushing things in, and we have
to be able to stand up against that before we
(32:31):
reach a point where between AI and you know, the
nature of temporary work of the gig economy, it becomes
harder and harder to organize ourselves.
Speaker 2 (32:41):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (32:42):
The other thing that I've noticed that it's made strikeing
so difficult and that we have to be aware of,
is the pacification of the domestication of unions. Right, there
was a time historically were a powerful, influential revolutionary even
(33:05):
for us, such as not the case today. Unfortunately. You know,
they have some legislation put in place that many unions
are terrified of crossing. Every I has to be dotted,
every ts to be crossed, and so the things that
would actually make union action the most effective after the
things that unions nowadays will refuse to do, sympathy strikes,
(33:28):
general strikes. And so what can we do if we
are in an industry where the union is collaboration with management,
with union is utterly reformist to the union refuses to
actually step up and represent the people are supposed to
represent it. And this is where historically wildcat illegalist strikes
(33:49):
have had to come into play. Strikes that do not
depend upon legality, that do not sit back and wave permission,
that carry far more risks, of course, that are far
more difficult to organize, but are going to be necessary
if we want to liberate ourselves from this constant capitulation
(34:12):
toward the machine. In the article Striking against the Work
War Machine by Jeff Schantz and PJ. Lily, they said,
quote wartime strikes and sabotage partly because their illegal and
unsanched of nature bring rank and file workers together outside
of union structures. Workers have to make crucial decisions about
for this strike directly in face to face meetings or
(34:35):
on the picquet lines. Bureaucrats who are left to their
fundamental role of broken with the bosses can be relegated
to this sidelines and such situations in Germany in nineteen seventeen,
illegal strikes help us sweep the union structures right out
of workplaces. Strikes increasingly took on an anti union as
well as anti boss character, with wildcats occurring in crowing
(34:58):
numbers throughout the armor this and beyond. So I wanted
to of course pull on this example because this is
not a unique issue. Right Even historically where unions have
stood against the struggle of workers against more or against
you know, actually defending the class interests, the rank and
(35:18):
file have had to organize themselves importantly, So that's also
something to keep in mind. Yeah, and last but least,
I just want to see to s ry briefly on
the proposed side of the social revolution equation when it
comes to anti war struggle, and as usual, this is
going to take solidarity materially, not just saying that we
stand in solidarity with such and such and such, actually
(35:40):
share an aid, share a notes, supporting refugees and going
fully the because this, I think is where a lot
of our energy needs to be right now. Our efforts
to oppose are going to be for the most part
to us as long as we don't have an underlying
structure that we are building upon that be a seeken
to defend and to spa You know, we are not
(36:01):
at a position right now where we pose muchever threat yet,
and we also have to consider that merely posing a
threat is not going to liberate us by itself. So
I want you to consider, as we you know, wrap
up this episode, what you can do to put forward
(36:22):
that our seriences to actually try to create the new
social arrangements that we think should replace capitalist statust militarist order.
And this is something that I talk about on my
channel of course. I talk about building the commons, building
alternative media, autentsive economy, and developing our powers, our drives,
and our consciousness. And so you can check that out
(36:45):
if you'd like. Unfortunately, this is it is happening here,
and don't forget you could check out the YouTube, the Patreon,
et cetera, or Power to all the people Peace.
Speaker 2 (37:02):
It could happen here is a production of cool Zone Media.
For more podcasts from cool Zone Media, visit our website
coolzonmedia dot com or check us out on the iHeartRadio, app,
Apple podcasts, or wherever.
Speaker 3 (37:14):
You listen to podcasts, you can now find sources for
it could happen here, listed directly in episode descriptions. Thanks
for listening.
All the media, Hello, and welcome to it could happen here.
I'm Andrew Siege as soon as andrewism on YouTube, and
I'm here with it's James, And honestly I shouldn't see
welcome to it could happen. Yeah, I should really see
welcome to it is happening here, because I mean, just
(00:22):
just a second with you, James, how are you doing?
Speaker 2 (00:24):
You're safe?
Speaker 3 (00:25):
I'm okay, yeah, I'm safe right now. We are living
through wild times in the United States. Every day is
a new hell.
Speaker 1 (00:36):
Indeed, indeed, and although I'm not in the US, the
flames of that hell definitely lick the rest of the world.
Speaker 2 (00:42):
In weis big as tomorrow.
Speaker 3 (00:43):
Yeah, they definitely do. I was just talking to people
in Syria yesterday and like the alavis Ala white when
everyone call our levies, if you want to say it,
are facing quite substantial persecution currently and like one of
the larger refugee accepting countries in the world isn't doing
that anymore unless you're a white South African of course,
and like that has these massive trickle down effects for everywhere.
(01:08):
It's just one example of how America so goes, the
US so goes, the world.
Speaker 1 (01:12):
You know, indeed, indeed, and not just in Syria, are
the flavors of conflict tearing up with the part I
think most people I now know what the situation in Palestine,
the way that Israel was carrying on to genocide there.
You know, the Russia's invasion of Ukraine, the civil war
in Myanmar, in Sudan, the you know, struggle between India
(01:34):
and Pakistan over Kashmir and the kashmir people who are
you know, left on the on the wayside. You know,
the Tamil genocide yep, taking place in in Sri Lanka.
I mean, there's so many things happening across the world
right now, it's really difficult.
Speaker 2 (01:53):
To keep up.
Speaker 3 (01:55):
Yeah. The friends in Meanma would prefer the framing of
revolution to civil war. They're pretty explicit about that.
Speaker 1 (02:03):
Okay, Yeah, you're right, you're right, you're right, I should
be using that terminology.
Speaker 3 (02:08):
Yeah, it's not appropriate everywhere, but in their case, there
has been a civil war since forty eight, and it's
a substantial change with the twenty twenty one revolution.
Speaker 1 (02:16):
Right, right, right, right, Yeah, thank you for that correction. Yeah, yeah,
of course, I think now is a really good time
to have a general almost strategic discussion on anti war struggle.
And so today I really want to look at how
we can come to the propaganda around war, the actions
that are possible to take against militarism at home, and
(02:38):
how we can build solidarity across.
Speaker 2 (02:40):
Oceans and borders.
Speaker 1 (02:42):
Yeah, so to understand how to actually against war, we
first need to agitate against militarism.
Speaker 2 (02:48):
And fosse who don't know.
Speaker 1 (02:49):
Militarism is the belief or policy that the nation should
maintain a strong military and we prepare to use it
aggressively to defend or promote its interests. That involves glorifying
military vish use and ideals and prioritizing military strength and
readiness above other aspects of society. So it's a basic
Google definition. My copy of the Anarchist Encyclopedia is the
(03:12):
English version, which is aberged sadly, but the original French
has the full unabridged Anarchist Encyclopedia. So with a bit
of shaky online translation magic and managed to pull its
definition of militarism as well. Miltarism is a system that
consists of having and maintaining military personnel. It's essential and
avolt goal is a preparation for war, the recruitment of
(03:33):
a standing army, in the organization of the cajuris of
reserve army, the accumulation, the putting in place, the maintenance
in a state of service of ever more modern, more
perfected war material. In short, it is the preliminary organization
of war. What are the implications of that, Well, all
over the world I think we can see, you know,
the consequences of statism, the might makes right, pursuit of conquest,
(03:58):
the fighting wars abroad at home for the strategic interests,
ideological commitments, resource claims, whatever the case may be. The
rivalries within the rule in class, and how that pleas out,
and how it's that that blows back on all of
our faces, you know, the profits the military industrial complex
which keeps this whole system chewing on, you know, the
(04:20):
blood of innocence, of course, the longstanding consequences and continued
work of colonialism. And of course, the way is that
militarism gets turned inward with this suppression of strikes, of activism,
of popular unrest. When the now militarized police aren't enough,
they often bring in the military itself and reports with
(04:43):
militarism you also have the narrative component, you know, the
building of patriotism that so plans the seed of fascism.
States can survive without military is true. The state typically
to ends upon some effort or some attempt at monopoly
(05:05):
on the legitimate use of violence within the territory by
some definitions. But the states which do not have militaries
often can do so because they've outsourced their military functions
to another state, and or because they have other systems
in place to control descent, to develop a certain degree
of social condition and pacify the population.
Speaker 3 (05:29):
I'm just trying to think of states of the militaries,
like in my experience, I guess you have like the
Panama right, doesn't have a military. It has the Center Front,
which are like the frontier protection, I guess, but essentially
like a militarized border patrol. And they do have marines
and stuff as well, I guess, so they kind of
do have a military, but it's a kind of a
renaming exercise more than anything.
Speaker 1 (05:49):
Indeed, the same thing of having a militarized police, but
it's not a military technically, yeah, or having a militarized
coast guard and it's not a military technically you.
Speaker 3 (05:57):
Know, yeah, yeah, you have the countries they republic the
Marshall Islands, which just outsources its its militarization to the
United States, right like the US. Well, I think that
is a distinct thing. People in the Marshall Islands have
seen the horrors of war very closely and also the
dangers of militarization, right like, the United States nuked the
(06:21):
Marshall Islands a country with which it had no quarrel
with which it was not at war, just to practice
in case it needed to innuk a country with which
it did have a quarrel. I guess the legacy of
that is very obvious and continues to this day there.
But if marshal Ly's people wish to join a military,
they can join the US military, and the US guarantees
their security and theory that it's it's yeah, it is
(06:41):
a distinct. For instance, if you joined the US military
in the Marshall Islands wish to access your veterans benefits,
the easiest way to do so is take a five
hour flight to Hawaii. Like, they don't have any any
any benefits for actual veterans there, So I guess in
that case, like maybe it does give people a different
relationship to like state violent.
Speaker 1 (07:01):
Yeah, it's I mean obviously different places to have different
histories as to how they came to those arrangements. But
you definitely see a relationship between colonialism and the outsourcing
of military functions.
Speaker 3 (07:16):
Yeah, definitely.
Speaker 1 (07:18):
Now, historically anarchists have been anti militarists. The encyclopedias call
this aspect of the anarchist struggle. The aim to disqualifying militarism,
to denounce it's terrible and painful consequences, to combat the
warlike and bar expert, distigmatize and dishonor war, to abolish
(07:38):
the regime of the armies. So abolition militarism looks like
material relief from the oppression military violence, the redirection of
resources that go toward military toward instead things that actually
benefit the lives of everyday people, you know, the reduction
(07:59):
of pain and suffering throughout the world, the abolition of borders,
which so often are the motivating force behind military exercise.
And while no anarki so deny that armed strugglers necessary
for defense, it's not the same as having an imperialistic
or hierarchical ambition towards you know, power, over towards dominating
(08:22):
our populations of people.
Speaker 3 (08:24):
Yeah, this reminds me of the discussion that happened in
the CNT and Spain in the nineteen thirties previous to
the Civil War, even before that, right where they there
was a very profound and obvious discussion on how to
defend their evolution, how to defend communities whilst maintaining anti militarism.
(08:47):
And that's why we didn't see like that was not
a like standing army. Beyond you had affinity groups, right,
and then you had like defense committees of six six
to eight people, and those people like took on the
role of organizing for a potential violent like in order
(09:07):
to defend the community, right, like to use violence to
defend the community against violence. But even as it became
clearer and clearer that Spain was like spiraling towards conflict,
they resisted the idea of establishing and I think more
militarized than that.
Speaker 1 (09:21):
Yeah, And I think so what it's been a really
good place to look at first way, some experiments or
efforts or ideas would have played out, Strategies would have
played out, and I think it's really important to take
those experiments and see how we can iterate on them. Yeah,
and build upon them, because I mean what I've always
admired that we've carried on this anti militarist torch. It's
(09:45):
very important to remember the landscape US changed from war
times past. You know, we're not in World War times anymore. Yes,
you know, the strategies and the discussions and the approaches
that may have worked back then, it doesn't work.
Speaker 2 (10:01):
In the same way now.
Speaker 1 (10:02):
You don't even have to declare war officially anymore. In
this day and age. You can just say that, oh,
you're doing a special military operation, or you can just
send billions of dollars of aid to a country that
you want to support, and even troops to the countries
want to support, and technically you have un declared warrior.
Speaker 2 (10:24):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (10:25):
And you know, not only that, you also get to
unleash generational trauma and poison upon generations of people. But
it's okay because you're going after some terrorists. You know,
you just get to push money and supplies towards this
camp or that, and whether the US is concerned and
at least used to have to seek congressional approval, but
(10:50):
as we see, that's not really a thing. Now, especially
post nine eleven. You know, back in the day, people
thought putting pressure on the elected officials through protest for
being a and you know, there's a the b to
be had to the extent to which that worked for
situations like the Vietamo. But as we've seen with this
song and Dance again and again and again, the protests
(11:11):
are not hitting like they used to. You know, the
response to the protest has been so it's routine at
this point. You know, you just send the police to
bash some heads in or a bat to get the
military because the movers and the shakers on the people
who can actually be reached with these protests, you know,
and no matter how peaceful we proclaim our protests to be,
(11:32):
we're talking about moneyed interests here, you know, a military
industrial complex that has to have line go up. You
know who who doesn't have to give a damn about
some people walking on the road. You know, the system
has grown since the nineteen tens, the nineteen fourteen is
it has grown in such size and complexity to the
point where you know, you don't have to care necessarily
(11:55):
about a single movement, but about a single action and
a protest.
Speaker 3 (11:59):
Yeah, and the two kind of combine and like what
we're seeing in the United Kingdom right now, right like
there's the complete dismissal of protests and this like I'm
thinking a better word than imprecise, but like the vagueness
of the definition of terrorism has allowed the government of
the United Kingdom, in combination with the absence of a
Bill of Rights in the United Kingdom, right to just
(12:20):
be like, oh, Palestine Action and terrorists like you are
the same as the Islamic State because Palestine Action undertook
it in non violent direct action, right, But it's ludicrous
to suggest that that that was terrorism and that it
doesn't mean any reasonable definition of the term. But yet
we're in a stage now where governments can declare anyone
(12:42):
the enemy without any particular oversight. And that's the logical
conclusion of two decades of this.
Speaker 1 (12:48):
Yeah, I mean, to an extent, that has always been
the case. I think what's different now is that they're
not even really attempting to hide behind any sort of
consistent principles or consistent standards, you know, because even back
back then, you know, the artists are being called terrorists
and being mm hmm true, you know, chastised for that.
Speaker 3 (13:08):
Yeah, I guess also, like our class system is more
entrenched than it ever has been in a sense, I'm
just thinking, like, wars are not fought by the mass
of middle class. And like the people who become senators
for the most part, right, I mean, in the US
of Downs, senators will have done military service. It can
(13:30):
sort of boost their career opportunities. I get that, But
like it is not for the most part, the sons
of the of the people who who start the wars
who die in the wars. Right, it's indeed people of
a different class in a way that even in a
distinct way from the era of the World wars, right
when and when large numbers of people of the middle class,
(13:54):
especially maybe not the very privileged people that like did
die in those wars. And I think like the memory
of the First World War probably did have some impact
on like the reticence of some politicians to dive into
the second one. But we don't really have that now.
Speaker 1 (14:11):
Indeed, so we criticize this particular approach of the protest
and I know that the inevitable question is, so what
can we even do at this point? And you know
(14:32):
this is why I consider it very important to take
a step back and look at what is actually keeping
the system going right, and what's keeping the system going
is and it's always been labor. Right, not to say
that labor and labor struggles to be all and all
of our politics, but it is to say that if
(14:52):
we want to make a significant impact, that is what
we have the greatest control over our labor. And so
when I talk about things we can do to affect change,
I always had to take it back to the ongoing
process of social revolution. The things you do to oppose
and of things you do to propose, you know, on
(15:14):
the opposing side of things, that includes counter messaging. You know,
even though we may not have the resources of mainstream
media or government communications, we have weight of mouth, we
have trust between ourselves, and we have alternative media that
can be, especially in this day and age, just as
powerful if sparked right, Especially considering the fact that the
(15:37):
general sentiment, the populist sentiment, has, whether coming from a
leftist direction or a right dist direction, the general sentiment
has been moving toward anti establishment politics. The anti establishment
sort of momentum is what's growing right now. And the
(15:58):
issue of course being that sometimes that anti established and
momentum can be hijacked, such as what Trump did you
know to get himself elected the first time he rode
that wave and you know, this whole Epstein situation, we
may see that foundation of his base potentially crumbling.
Speaker 2 (16:17):
A part of it.
Speaker 1 (16:18):
But we have to look at what is actually motivating
people right now and how they can be reached. An
alternative media with an anti establishment message message is I
think one of the better ways to do so. Yeah,
you know, wherever you see it, it needs to be
out there, you know, on social media or through other
avenues calling out the ridiculous Cassius bellies used to manufacture
(16:43):
consent for you know, to be wary of potential forced
flags can be used as a justification for military action
to consistently poor calls in the narratives that have allowed
you know, nationalists and and xenophobic sentiments to become the
force that they have become today. And of course even
(17:05):
engaged in that messaging. Of course, try not to let
campus on infect your counter message in either. Yeah, you know,
that's how you get people who are you know, they gung,
who are about a free Palestine, and then they start when
they ask them about Ukraine all of a sudden, it's
actually really complicated. It's actually the fault of the US
and the EU and need to and not Russia, even
(17:28):
though Russia is the one who actually invaded and is
actively killing people and this strial infra short as we speak. Yeah, right,
I mean there's conversation to be had about the US
and what's the EU, and about NATO obviously, but it's
very clear.
Speaker 3 (17:43):
Yeah, it's very uncomplicated.
Speaker 1 (17:45):
Who's actually killing people right now?
Speaker 3 (17:47):
You know. Yeah, there is one country which is taking
the children right and trying to like re educate them
give them to families, in Russia, which is committing murders
of civilians. Like, we don't have to resort to like
ten year geopolitical trajectories to say that it's wrong and
it should be opposed exactly exactly.
Speaker 1 (18:10):
And also I want to make this point about counter
messaging because it's a consistent gripe I've had, In fact,
one of the main reasons I started my channel in
the first place. With your comment message in whether it's
in person or on the Internet or wherever, don't stay
perpetually on the back foot, you know, the words, don't
just counter message. Yeah, you know right now, and it's
(18:33):
what irritates me so much. The right wing sets the conversation. Yeah,
you know, you have people they say, oh, we want
to talk about critical race theory, and then everybody's talking
about critical rais theory because they talk to where they
want to target trans people, and all of a sudden
we have to scrabble to respond to all their erroneous
and ridiculous claims about trans people. Yeah, that comment message
(18:56):
is an important, is important, but it cannot be all
that we do, right Yeah, and this is a bit
how to that feel. But you know, of course I'm
not the one who is partiality liketoral approaches. But you
can see some of that not just counter message in
but also actively messaging taking place with Zora Mum Danny's strategy. Yeah,
(19:20):
you know, when you look at how he speaks, how
he addresses some of.
Speaker 2 (19:23):
The badly the doarguments are made against him.
Speaker 1 (19:26):
His rhetorical strength and popularity in part lies on his
refusal to carry on the conversation on the enemies too,
you know, so they will go at him for something
and he's going to spit it right back around to
talking about the things that it's just really master to
people to set the conversation to get people to respond
to that, because all other responses toward him have been
(19:48):
trying to distract from his actual message in and his
ability to steal on message is something I find really admirable,
despite you know, my concerns about the vestment of energy
and electoral strategies.
Speaker 3 (20:02):
Sure, yeah, yeah, yeah, there are certain things we can
admire about those people if we don't agree with everything.
And I do think like in that sense something I
think about a lot with like messaging and countermessaging, especially
around war. It's like I've spent some time in the
Anes and what people call Java, and like one of
(20:25):
the framings that I've consistently seen, and it's mostly in
like the Libleaning mass media, I guess, is that people
went to Rajaba to fight against Is or Dash or Isis,
whatever you want to call it, right, and like in
doing so, that is how the revolutionary Jarba is not
understood by most people, right, and they have taken the
(20:47):
power away from it in their framing of it, because
people didn't just go. Some people did go justify I
right that there they went because they saw what I
was doing. They understood its inhumane and they wanted that
to stop, and that's admirable. But people also went because
they saw what people were building in Rajava and they
thought that was beautiful and they wanted to defend it,
(21:08):
and that's admirable too. And sometimes the messaging around specifically
ra Java, Mia and Mar to an extent right their
international volunteers there too, and of course that like folks
from the AMMA who have picked up weapons who never
thought they would, and they didn't just do it to
oppose the hunter. They did it because like in there,
despite all the horrible things about war then and like
(21:31):
it should be avoided at all costs. In the conflict,
they have built liberated spaces and they've experienced freedom and
they have experienced how that feels, and they've built a
revolution that is beautiful in spite of the war, not
because of it, and they want to defend that. And
I think that's a messaging that we should we should consider, right,
(21:55):
because the messaging that everything has to be against something
bad always sort of it presupposes so that there can't
have been something good, and in some cases there has
been something good, and like we won't fully understand what
was happening there unless we understand that, and I think
we should push back on that messaging what we see it,
(22:17):
especially in the great legacy media.
Speaker 1 (22:20):
Absolutely, absolutely, and that really connects to the you know,
the other aspect of the social revolution paradigm, because it's
not just about opposing and so it's proposing that that's
something different. Yeah, and that is often far more energizing
and then simply talking about everything that's wrong.
Speaker 2 (22:40):
With the world. Yeah, definitely.
Speaker 1 (22:43):
And I think also for those who maybe have concerns
about the risks of oppositional messaging, there's another area where
you can direct your energy to support the opposition without
necessarily actively being involved in it, you know, because it's
not enough to just oppose the system. You have to
build something else, and you could be part of that
(23:04):
building something else, you know, swim a message and you
want to be able to readirect people's energies to the
actual frustrations and interests, you know, to re center the
conflicting the lens on the actual divisions of society, such
as class, to make moneyed interests known. And you know,
even though it's never been easy to be anti war,
(23:26):
you know, especially in the center of empire, and in
many ways technologies is today have empowered much greater repression.
You know, in Russia, individual and mass protests are met
with severe oppression, massive finds, geo sentences, et cetera. In
the US you can face police brutality, censorship, even deportation.
And in Israel, I haven't seen or heard anything from
(23:51):
the Israeli populus in terms of resisting what Israel is
doing to the Palestinians. But I know that those who
do stand against the mandatory conscription do face jail time
for their refusal. So it's not easy to be anti war,
especially in militarized and empire building territories. I get that
(24:12):
stress and that worry that opposition is still necessary, but
there's other things.
Speaker 2 (24:17):
But we can we do it than just messaging.
Speaker 1 (24:19):
Yeah, you know, there are things that take on less risk,
such as building an alternative, and there are things that
take on more risk. Now protests, even peaceful protests, are
no longer risk free, endeavers. And I know when most
people hear what you know, we need to push back,
they hear, okay, let's organize a protest. Honestly, we could
(24:41):
use a bit more imagination in this day and age,
Like I said, the protest is not hitting like it
used to. It's become like a pressure valve or a
tool of path it that could be tolerated for a
(25:02):
time and then met with repression the moment it's time
to wrap it up. And they have a couple of
reasons why protests are not you know, able to do
as much. You know, they have the moneyed interests. You know,
they can end up being divided according to various arguments
of a strategy. And I'm sorry to say this, but
protests as of late it haven't accomplished very much besides
(25:27):
getting people mutilated or jailed or worse in the past
few years. And in fact, a lot of the resources
that could be spent you know, building alternatives are being
spent instead on you know, paying people's bonds and getting
people out of jail, prison relief, that sort of thing.
Not to say those things are not necessary, you know,
don't don't leave your comrades to trot and jail. But
(25:50):
I think we need to consider the free data that
we've basically been giving away to through laying class in
the form of pictures, names, addresses, identifying data that they
can be used to repress or just erupt or infiltrate
protesters and protesting organizations down the line, as James Herod
(26:12):
and s another James. As James Herod wrote in the
Weakness of our politics of protest, we have been getting
some of these critiques of protests from He says, thus,
instead of powerfully concentrate in our mental and physical energies
on solving this problem, to eliminate this obstacle to defeating capitalism,
(26:32):
we are taking to the streets once again merely protested,
merely incasion of what is basically mindless activism. Later, he says,
it's easy to agree on what to protest against. The
list of things that needs to be stopped on the
capitalism is long, so long, in fact, we don't even.
Speaker 2 (26:48):
Need to agree.
Speaker 1 (26:49):
There's plenty to choose from, so just pick something that
suits you. Perhaps this is why I'm meant so many
activists got involved in protesting. It's not so easy, though,
to figure out what we want to replace capitalism with,
to work out convincing arguments about how it will possibly work.
And they set about creating such a social world, especially
since so little energy has been devoted to the task
(27:09):
end quote. And you know, I get why protests are popular.
You know, as he says, it has a low barrier
to entry. You just have to show up. And in
a society that has been so deliberately atomized were mass
collective action as we made so difficult, protests has become
pretty much a very easy avenue to get those things done. Yeah,
(27:31):
and you know, protests can work in Sydney instances for
them and any goals, but I think that those uses
are diminishing day by day in the cost benefits analysis.
Speaker 3 (27:42):
Yeah, I'm just thinking about Like there was a letter
Georgio World wrote to one of his readers on the
subject of anti fascism where all were was lamenting that
the anti fascism that he was encountering in England right
in between his participation in the Spanish Civil War and
the Second World War or was always centered on hate
(28:02):
and like it's sort of an idea. We get the
two Minutes of Hate later in nineteen eighty four, right,
but maybe it comes from here, and like it never
proposed an alternative. It just said it pointed to something.
It said bad, something I've tried not to do in
my journalism. Right, It's very often we do this a
journalists too. We point something and say bad, and we
(28:22):
don't look for the waste that it could become better.
And so like protesting can become such an identity for
people like you see it. I'm just thinking of like
every time I get sent a link to Instagram, right,
which is a platform I don't really participate on, but
I will look at things and they'll be like, oh,
(28:43):
San Diego protest news, san Diego protester, so Cow protester,
and like, I think we should resist that being an
identity because we want to build something beautiful as well
as oppose what is bad. And if we don't have
something beautiful to propose, what do we do out there?
Speaker 2 (29:01):
Exactly? Exactly?
Speaker 1 (29:03):
And you know there's room for protests. I don't want
to give off the impression and that there isn't you know,
But for all the lovely talk about peaceful protests, that
works when there's an actual threat backing up those protests.
You know, you don't just do the peaceful protest. You know,
Gandhi didn't single handedly win India's independence by marching peacefully.
(29:25):
You know, there has to be something back, and it's
up or else It's going to be very easy to ignore.
Speaker 2 (29:28):
And suppress.
Speaker 1 (29:29):
Yeah, and I think that protests should not be our
default right now. They are our default, and I think
they are better uses of all collective time, energy and resources,
even though protests are very easy compared to some of
the things.
Speaker 2 (29:44):
That are more necessary right now.
Speaker 1 (29:46):
You know, but if protest is where you're dead set
on funneling energy, I would just say that you should
at least learn d r S strategies. You know, their
resources online to get some information on that. De arrest strategies,
you can look it up. But if it's possible, if
you see the situation playing out, you know, try not
to sit by and let your comrades get pulled away.
(30:09):
You know, it is very possible the numbers on your
side to prevent the police from harassment targets and taken
away people. You know, there's other stuff you can do
as well besides protests that I keep alluding to, because
you know, sadly the media is no longer you know,
a safe space to share things in depth in some cases.
(30:32):
But just remember that the key is actual disruption. You know,
the media will not be with you, it'll be trying
to manufacture consent on everything that you do. Manufacture consent
against any action taken on the things that you do.
And the only way to counteract that is to maintain
relationships on the ground, to maintain actual local solidarity. Because
(30:52):
once you have those local relationships, in that local solidarity,
there's no amount of things that the media can do
the media could stir up that can vent the people
who see that you're on their side, see that you're
stand up for them.
Speaker 2 (31:04):
To turn a gention. Right.
Speaker 1 (31:06):
What problem happens is when you don't have any relationships,
you don't have any networks, you don't have any community building,
You just doing stuff. The messaging is unclear.
Speaker 2 (31:16):
You know.
Speaker 1 (31:16):
That's where I think the media could really pounce on that.
I would also say, you know, sabotage, you know, hit
their pockets.
Speaker 2 (31:23):
And the main thing.
Speaker 1 (31:25):
The thing that I've been alluded to earlier, is to strike,
you know, to organize strikes to use ther labor power.
Worker's power still comes from a participation in production and
the threat of withdrawing our participation. We have to realize
that in this time we're living in, even the effectiveness
(31:46):
of strikes have come under threat in two ways. The
first way is that the permanence of employment is not
what it used to be. And with the rise and
spread of AI, you know, you have to ask yourself
how long will strike since ITTA in fields be effective anymore.
You know, I have my doubt that EI will ever
(32:08):
reach a point where it can replace people. But honestly,
for a lot of these companies, they don't necessarily care
about whether it's capable of replacing people or not. They
will still try and use it to replace people. So
we have to be cognizant of the fact that this
is the direction they're pushing things in, and we have
to be able to stand up against that before we
(32:31):
reach a point where between AI and you know, the
nature of temporary work of the gig economy, it becomes
harder and harder to organize ourselves.
Speaker 2 (32:41):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (32:42):
The other thing that I've noticed that it's made strikeing
so difficult and that we have to be aware of,
is the pacification of the domestication of unions. Right, there
was a time historically were a powerful, influential revolutionary even
(33:05):
for us, such as not the case today. Unfortunately. You know,
they have some legislation put in place that many unions
are terrified of crossing. Every I has to be dotted,
every ts to be crossed, and so the things that
would actually make union action the most effective after the
things that unions nowadays will refuse to do, sympathy strikes,
(33:28):
general strikes. And so what can we do if we
are in an industry where the union is collaboration with management,
with union is utterly reformist to the union refuses to
actually step up and represent the people are supposed to
represent it. And this is where historically wildcat illegalist strikes
(33:49):
have had to come into play. Strikes that do not
depend upon legality, that do not sit back and wave permission,
that carry far more risks, of course, that are far
more difficult to organize, but are going to be necessary
if we want to liberate ourselves from this constant capitulation
(34:12):
toward the machine. In the article Striking against the Work
War Machine by Jeff Schantz and PJ. Lily, they said,
quote wartime strikes and sabotage partly because their illegal and
unsanched of nature bring rank and file workers together outside
of union structures. Workers have to make crucial decisions about
for this strike directly in face to face meetings or
(34:35):
on the picquet lines. Bureaucrats who are left to their
fundamental role of broken with the bosses can be relegated
to this sidelines and such situations in Germany in nineteen seventeen,
illegal strikes help us sweep the union structures right out
of workplaces. Strikes increasingly took on an anti union as
well as anti boss character, with wildcats occurring in crowing
(34:58):
numbers throughout the armor this and beyond. So I wanted
to of course pull on this example because this is
not a unique issue. Right Even historically where unions have
stood against the struggle of workers against more or against
you know, actually defending the class interests, the rank and
(35:18):
file have had to organize themselves importantly, So that's also
something to keep in mind. Yeah, and last but least,
I just want to see to s ry briefly on
the proposed side of the social revolution equation when it
comes to anti war struggle, and as usual, this is
going to take solidarity materially, not just saying that we
stand in solidarity with such and such and such, actually
(35:40):
share an aid, share a notes, supporting refugees and going
fully the because this, I think is where a lot
of our energy needs to be right now. Our efforts
to oppose are going to be for the most part
to us as long as we don't have an underlying
structure that we are building upon that be a seeken
to defend and to spa You know, we are not
(36:01):
at a position right now where we pose muchever threat yet,
and we also have to consider that merely posing a
threat is not going to liberate us by itself. So
I want you to consider, as we you know, wrap
up this episode, what you can do to put forward
(36:22):
that our seriences to actually try to create the new
social arrangements that we think should replace capitalist statust militarist order.
And this is something that I talk about on my
channel of course. I talk about building the commons, building
alternative media, autentsive economy, and developing our powers, our drives,
and our consciousness. And so you can check that out
(36:45):
if you'd like. Unfortunately, this is it is happening here,
and don't forget you could check out the YouTube, the Patreon,
et cetera, or Power to all the people Peace.
Speaker 2 (37:02):
It could happen here is a production of cool Zone Media.
For more podcasts from cool Zone Media, visit our website
coolzonmedia dot com or check us out on the iHeartRadio, app,
Apple podcasts, or wherever.
Speaker 3 (37:14):
You listen to podcasts, you can now find sources for
it could happen here, listed directly in episode descriptions. Thanks
for listening.
It Could Happen Here News
Hosts And Creators
Robert Evans
Garrison Davis
James Stout
Show Links
AboutPopular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Special Summer Offer: Exclusively on Apple Podcasts, try our Dateline Premium subscription completely free for one month! With Dateline Premium, you get every episode ad-free plus exclusive bonus content.