Anarchy: a journal of desire armed. #36, Spring 1993 anticopyright - Anarchy may be reprinted at will for non-profit purposes, except in the case of individual copyrighted contributions. LETTERS -includes part one of three @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ _Have_something_to_say?__Write_us!_ We would like to encourage you to write us in order to continue this dialogue, whether you are sympathetic or critical of anarchist theories and practices. All letters will be printed with the auth- or's initials only, unless it is specifically stated that her/his full name may be used or that s/he wishes to remain anonymous, or the name already appears in Anarchy - as in the case of an author of an essay or creator of artwork published here. We will edit letters that are redundant, overly long, unreadable or excessively boring. (Ellipses in italicized brackets [...] indicate editorial omissions.) Limit length to four double-spaced, typewritten pages. Address your letters to C.A.L., POB 1446, Columbia, MO. 65205-1446. We look forward to hearing from you! Keep us posted Dear Compa¤eros/as: Thank you for sending me the Summer '92 issue of Anarchy. I gleaned so much from it that now I'm wondering what I've missed out on in your back issues [...] I am also interested in reading some of the original writings of Proudhon, Kropotkin, Bakunin, and Ricardo Flores Mag˘n. I have already read the few watered down books available from the Tucson Library through an outside prison library service, however, TCN ibrary doesn't have any of the original writings that I seek, and it seems that TCN Library has never heard of Proudhon or Kropotkin. Any material sent to me (paperback and not more than 6 of anything) will be perused by many more than myself. Also, keep us posted on Os Cangaceiros. Perhaps, an article giving your readers a historical picture of this kind of activity, where the citizens of the world in their respective geographical areas have taken it upon themselves to sabotage or to bring down the walls, will inspire la gente to a new pastime. Well my friends, I have Rudolf Rocker here in my cell explaining to me his Nacionalismo y Cultura. It's sad how some of us have wasted so much time and blood fighting amongst ourselves for the impoverished streets of our barrios, ghettos and gangs that don't even belong to us. But, as it recently became obvious to the world in May, the pain soaked walls and the land steeped with blood and sweat are very fertile; fertile with the seeds of tomorrow! Water them; water them with the past, the now, the future. Yet be aware that they, the wild seeds, will sprout and grow with or without you. The land is so rich, freedom is so intangible, pain and frustration are so felt, why then such passiveness? Sigamos luchando y apprendiendo, Jaime Enrique Baxter #88410-012 F.C.I. 8901 S. Wilmot Rd. Tucson, AZ. 85706 State-produced dust Dear @ friends, I have just moved into a dorm at college - I'm a freshman here. Brought my collection of Anarchy mags and believe me, I have thoroughly read and re-read them. This is a Methodist college full of mindless assholes. My roommate "didn't get" a short fiction story I wrote for a friend about the day our gov't starts charging money for people to breathe air. He told me it was `unrealistic', and when I asked him what he thought about paying for food (another necessity of life) he told me that was `different'. Anyway, I love your mag. I was an anarchist in 8th grade due to my dissatisfaction w/ school, but after I was thoroughly put down by my relatives and busted for my beliefs (making explosives from science-room chemicals I stole) I was brainwashed by a shrink and almost caught shoplifting. I decided to lay low, and my mind collected state-produced dust. I'm currently trying to kick tobacco addiction and trying to prove that Ritalin really doesn't work. I was on it for 2 school quarters, then stopped for a quarter and my grades went up, not that grades matters. I also felt better physically. Anyway, kids - doctors can be drug pushers too. "Learning stimulants" are just speed. They fuck up your metabolism, buzz you up, and eventually can drive you to depression (as they did me). Well, enough I think. Will subscribe as soon as I got bloody money. Pissed Peoples of the Planet Unite! A.D. (no address by request) Looking Dear Anarchy, I have received #33/Summer '92. I have paid what I could afford for it, $2.00, and you were kind enough to send it to me. I am a Wisconsin prisoner. I got your address from ApaEros which belonged to a friend. This capitalistic system holds me back. I am in the hole (seg) and shall be till at least 1993 (July). I am requesting the free prisoner subscription you advertise. I would continue to pay but they have taken all my money for so-called `restitution'. I also request that you trade my address with any other papers or projects especially sexually-oriented papers, mags, projects, etc. My release date is August 25, 1995... Also I was wondering if you could like publish my address in your mag so someone writes to me. I am a 19 year old male who loves women! Of all shapes, sizes, and colors!...I am looking for females to write, also please add I request photographs. Well, thank you, komrades! Anarchy in the U.S. Amerika Awake! Jayson J. Strieter #186727 Greenbay Correctional Inst. Green Bay, WI. 54307-9033 Pen friends wanted My dear friend, I very much want to have pen friends in your country. Please help me, if you may. I will be very glad if I will have friends in your country in the future.. I'm a citizen of the Ukraine. My name is Sergei. I'm Ukrainian. I was born on 25th October 1963 year. Now I live in the village of Novonikolaevka. My hobbies - photo, tourism, music, travel by car, collection of foreign banknotes, stamps, postcards, magazines, discs, etc. I know English, Ukrainian and Russian. I send answers to all peoples, who wanted to have pen friends with me. Please help me. Yours sincerely, Sergei Naydonov 28, Ostrovskogo St. vil. Novonikolaevka Melitopolskij Rajon Zaporozhskayaobl. 332375 Ukraina Remembering Bob Brubaker Cherubic cheeks sweet smile across his small mouth clear eyes full-chested hugs Bob's fatal asthma condition is something I don't remember him discussing much with me during the short time he lived in San Francisco. Running together in Golden Gate Park, I remember Bob always looking fit; from Japan he wrote of his pleasure running regularly. He also hiked up Mt. Fuji where he was struck by the myriad of lights from other hikers' lanterns. Bob's words painted a picture reminiscent of a scenen by the Japanese 19th century artists Hiroshige and Hokusai. Bob grappled with his writing, which he felt was inadequate. This self-criticism followed him from Detroit, where he worked on the Fifth Estate to Japan, where he continued to read and write, nevertheless. Bob loved to write letters full of lucid descrip- tions, critiques, reviews. These could easily have been compiled to create publishable pieces, but he wasn't easily convinced of this. Some of Bob's friends in the U.S. didn't understand or accept his living in Japan. I believe he was nurtured by his exile from the frustrations of living in the U.S., including the problem of trying to exist in more of a political vacuum than any of us had experienced in the late '60s or early '70s. In 1986 he wrote from Japan: "It is a fascinating place. It is, of course, very industrialized, very modern and people are very middle class (consumer oriented) in their interests, so the exoticism that some foreigners are looking for is largely absent. But it's sufficiently different from the U.S. to be continually intriguing (in my opinion), and I've found people to be very friendly and kind. I've been invited into peo- ple's homes, and have quite a few good friends here. There are frustrations and difficulties, too, and not all Japanese people are kindly disposed toward foreigners. Overall, my experience in Japan (and Heidi's, too) has been very positive." When Bob thought of returning, he considered Eugene because of the ease of living without a car, as well as the opportunity to work with John Zerzan and others. Recently he had considered moving to Columbia, Missouri to work on Anarchy. But he kept going back to Japan after his visits to the U.S. And he kept staying, even through break-ups with lovers. I will remember Bob as a warm friend, as a person who stood firm against this deadly system, and especially as someone who took pleasure in resistance. When Bob recounted his antics against authorities, he'd get this impish grin. As I live in the wake of Bob's death, I hope his rebellious spirit will continue to kindle my own. Melen Lunn San Francisco, CA. The family war of child abuse & neglect Dear Anarchy, Yes! I totally agree with & dig the Positive Evidence for adult- child sex, tho i don't do it. You are courageous to print it, as is Featherstone for writing it in dangerous times. He balances his advocating freedom-of-choice & mutual consent while admitting vast child sexual abuses are happenin'. But still now these are both secret, because of antisexual laws & order/the walls-of-fear blaming-the-victims of hate. Now lets get deeper into child-abuses causes & effects of threats & internalized-taboos in most-civilized-people. In industrial- nations most all babies are neglected (except the wholistic families) of great needs for affection, touching & play within nature from birth on. This has created our public-schools & violent-sports because we missed the natural homebirth & bonding (need) period lasting our first 1-3 years or more in the-family- bed. So us hospital-born-babies with drugs (early start) by repressed adults customs of normal separations of: nursery bed, crib, carriage, hi-chair, car-seat & play-pens keep us apart from nature & intimate touching. These all make us fussy, mad, needy- suckers, crying for love. "Oh no! Martha, give'm a bottle, pacifier, a toy or sweet," (tit-sub) fix-fast to-shut 'em-up mom, say tense relatives. During 21 yrs of daily-soul-research starting with Primal screaming (therapy) alone for 2 weeks to release buried fear & pain, & regressing 100s of times since; my awareness of the causes & effects of birth, emotions & our energy changes keeps growing here. I'm still meeting my parents & children who had /have more bonding than older generations. But parents still have hidden- abuses that twist into projections of fear, trusting-illusions & getting sick without knowing why or how to prevent it naturally. So our forgotten birth-trauma, child-abuse & neglect make us lame, fear nature & in-conflicts stemming from the family-war we excuse with a ton of good-memories, hateful-blame & depending on doctors to know our body better than we do how to balance it all. These Primal (energy) causes of love & problems are mostly denied now because: 1. Memory block-Most adults were abused & neglected, but don't/can't recall it, doubting it's even possible to remember birth. 2. Child-abuse-is usually hidden in private rooms in homes (incest at nite) & hospitals of nice & clean (nazi) business, since the peace movement stopped public beatings for good. 3. Legal-systems-usually protect abusing-adults by denying legal/civil-rights of due-process of law to abused children. 4. The true causes of crime-are blamed by `experts' onto poverty, genes, frustration, drugs, racism (not pain & need). 5. Medical health-(lab) science does (must) deny all causing of birth-trauma & illness, to sell its hi-tech treatments, of numbing therapy (insured for the rich) trusting experts knowing our bodies mechanically, but denying nature's power. 6. Deep fears-of emotions, freelove, guilt-for-abuse, pain, child's-innocence & raw-nature keep us indoors for safety, and rationalized, like parents punishing children, "for their own good!" (see Alice Miller's books on this). 7. 100,000s of us into radical-therapy-& Nature-spirit are finding memories of childhood abuse & neglect (even birth), naturally- healing it by regressing, breathing & emoting, & becoming more sensitive, instinctual & creative lovinglife, while also feeling the shit of growing-up. The subconscious unwinds the energy-blocks we had to be clean, nice & good. So it's no wonder that the libertarians & anarchists don't seek or know the deep causes of normal-massive: fear & hate, body- stress, suicides, illness, drug-dependence/wars, cops & robbers, pollution & destruction or nature, burying us in shit. So most adults waddle or jog (& sleep) thru life or consuming, secretly carrying years of pain & fear from being threatened, punished & abused in childhood, pretending they're OK, better, best or bad. The consensus-of-denial=the illusion-of-state-democracy now. So we must evolve out natural-systems at home. Some great sources for understanding this are R.D. Laing's books on mental health: The Politics of the Family & Sanity, Madness & the Family that explain the causes of insanity are at home blaming- the-victim of (parents'-problems) abuse & neglect for seeking- freedom, (breaking rules), equality (respect), touching & access to nature-spaces, locked indoors. The legal-games cover-this-up with the age-of-consent laws, ageism/seniority, punishment (abusing) to train all youth to obey, consume & depend on big-adults to supply essentials is really hip- market-distractions from Nature, abuse pain & freedom, & need to scream about the hate, fear & pollution. Hawaii just passed a law allowing & justifying more "Use of force" & punishment to control- youth in the same category with incompetents, prisoners & mental- patients. So kids are like animals to dominate & punish, except by extreme damage. So reversing this trend of more control & less respect for children's civil-rights is greatly needed for a peaceful community of family love. Punishment-creates-violence & fearful people; while natural pleasure & cooperation come from affection, nature & freedom of self-regulation. It appears that most-sexual-problems are caused by fear & rules against intimacy from-birth-on, when bonding & nursing are needed! Kids-sex becomes stress/needs if exploring is forbidden, like parents hiding-their- sex from us children. If we missed nursing & bonding, the damage can be healed. For me rebonding with a nursing-loving mother in the family-bed when I was 40 years old, with Rebirthing was healing like lovenergy can be anywhere it's felt-all-over is ecstasy. This revolution is the absolute-freedom of natural-homeducation. So I'm starting the LCPCA: Local Center for Prevention of Child- Abuse & neglect naturally now to learn, heal & create love instead of the compulsory stresses of competitive life. Perhaps like Sweden, our most aware states can pass non-punishing laws forbidding child-abuse & promoting all natural & cooperative solutions to training children in life. Giving children: respect, choices & civil-rights will solve most of the problems we have in family & education wars now. Mycall Sunanda LCPCA, POB 28 Naalehu, HI. 96772 Anarchism is naturalism Anarchy friends, What is Anarchism but naturalism! Naturalism, I'd put it, is that which precedes this 6000-year civilization we're all enmeshed in. What precedes it is the 2- million-year prehistory. But early prehistory, or dawn days, the pre-hunting & fruitarian era. The later prehistory sees, at least on the part of the male, the hunting & killing of other species. Hunting, meateating, isn't quite natural. We by-nature are not carnivorous. Not our teeth, not our jaws, not our essential human disposition. We happen to be frugivorous. (Even vegetarianism is a later-prehistory phenomenon.) Prehistory precedes that formal, impersonal, artificial structure known as government, or the state. Prehistory likewise precedes that which is hooked to the state, to wit, class. An economic elite. Private Property. As of the emergence of agriculture and domestication of animals. Along with domestication of women & children. So the deeper into prehistory, the more naturalism - and Anar- chism. Having said all that, I'd like citing one more bit of pre- history - and naturalism - the relationship of the sexes. We today, we of 6000-year civilization, take for granted the male chasing the female, the male showing the initiative. Yet in prehistory, more emphatically dawn days, it's the reverse! At that time is the female chasing the male... when, that is, she's in heat! And when she is, she looks like what today's sexually aggressive male looks like. We sometimes say just that "He chases her till she catches him." This jest should offer a hint of what once-upon-a-prehistoric-time really had been! Ancestral memory! Today is the female still attracted to the male, still this naturalness. Except that she, `thanks' to the civilizational, Victorian & new-Victorian conditioning, has to suppress this show of attraction, or even the feeling of attraction, at least until marriage or mating. She then, not surprisingly, sometimes (maybe more than sometimes) becomes a "bedroom commando," if but from her nature-given capacity at orgasm at many-many times that of the male. The male, meanwhile - astonishing even to himself - finds himself in the role of the sexual passivity! Yet those latter roles are the natural roles, the dawn-time roles. So should we all go back to dawn-time? Why not! Except we retain our technology (like a beaver retaining its dam), but a technology no longer hooked to the capitalism or statism. Males, thus - to be more natural about matters - ought quit chasing the females, ought rather stay put and let the females do the chasing (about the way Ms. George Sand was doing toward Chopin). Of course most today's females won't do the chasing, what with the 6000-year conditioned passivity. So the males might have a long-long wait before being courted. So it's a problem! How have or bring back natural sexual relationships! But the real problem is civilization itself, or more accurately the kind of civilization - the statism, the classism, the strict monogamism, and the 6000-year taboo on that which dawn folk had no problem with - free love. S.C., Detroit, MI. Pedotopia Editors, Re: J. Featherstone's article, "Positive Child-Adult Sex: The Evidence," & related letters [see Anarchy #33/Summer '92 p.60]. Even if the anecdotes in the article were more widely known, they wouldn't make his `case' for him. Why did the children initiate these contacts? "Wanting to make a man happy" is considerably more sophisticated than infantile sexplay, & one wants to know not only where a 7-year-old learns the desire, but just how fellatio & happiness are related in her mind. Are these anecdotes to suggest that more children (of what social class? of what temperament?) would want sex with adults if taboos did not exist? Few of the children could continue their relationships; traumas followed discovery; even barring discovery, & given pleasure & affection, what if the adult dies? or contracts HIV? or faces some other disaster? Do children have the emotional strength & the support of friends & family to cope with these matters? `Consent' needs re-thinking. It involves more than acquiescence or pursuit: one who consents, as the word implies, has the same feel for the whole of an issue in common with another. In the best case, adults solicit the consent of children by teaching them what the whole involves, securing, not token expressions (specific to the issue) of a pre-existent, well-developed feel for the whole of life, but rather the terms according to which that capacity is extended or transformed. A parent, teacher, or guardian has a feel for the whole of a child's capacities, interests, history, temperament & so on - worlds away from bourgeois conventions of seduction (gifts, games, fun), which recognize no individuality. If children, like women, have been oppressed in their desires, then children will have to re-imagine themselves as women have done, transforming consent, erotic or romantic relationships, self- consciousness, & community. Wouldn't that child begin to be free who could not only desire stimulation or coitus (with adults or other children), but appreciate the spectrum of erotic & romantic relationships as social & historical fields of imaginative play & spiritual evolution, fantasize about ideal & possible partners, assessing family members, friends, teachers, acquaintances, consider & discuss initiating relationships, turning to friends, parents, mentors, or even books to clarify feelings & ideas, & express dissatisfaction & end relationships? C.D. of Somerville says he isn't afraid to look anyone in the eye & say he loves boys. So what? Does that help a child discover the possibilities & responsibilities of "fully armed" desire? He & Mr. Featherstone think people won't consider the idea of child-adult sex (a more accurate term than the barbarous "intergenerational consensual sex," which could just as well apply to Harold & Maude), but there is no such `idea' outside of social & historical reality. Pointing to ancient Greece or other archaic societies in which the sexual initiation of children is integrated into the political, philosophical, or spiritual feeling a people has for itself will do no good - if community is to include sexual relationships between children, adolescents, & adults that have positive psychological, social, economic, philosophical, political or spiritual significance, society will have to be re-invented. Unless pedophiles make babies & rear them in pedotopia, they will always be dealing with other people's children: that means kinship structures, education, money & social relations are involved. The `morality' of those relations is no more in question than a pedophile's resentment of prejudice - only the work of imagination & the actual effects of newly imagined relationships in society. What, for instance, are the possibilities of adults serving as sexual mentors to adolescents who risk pregnancy & disease? How could adults who desire adolescents keep them away from predators who are looking for `clean' prostitutes? Are other radical & healthy options possible? There is a moving French film, Sundays & Cybele, about a 30-ish amnesiac & a 12-year-old orphan girl who fall in love. She has conventional ideas (when she's 18 they'll marry), but, hiding her real name, clearly conscious of her power & her feelings, negotiates her childlikeness & growing womanhood with great charm. The muted eroticism of their friendship makes the tragic end a symbol of fear - but alerts us to responses, thoughts, hopes, desires, for this couple, that could be the beginning of a work of informed hearts. (Ditto for another French film, L'Adolescente.) Or we could recall how, in 1794, the 22-year-old German poet & philosopher Novalis spent 15 minutes with 12-year old Sophie & conceived a passion for her that changed his life; among the community of people who commented on the betrothal, even Goethe thought the girl remarkable. Aren't there other stories that exemplify neither pederasty nor pedophilia, but show adults who experience the love of a child as a personal revelation? On the strength of these stories & of my questions, I feel Mr. Featherstone has an enormous amount of work to do before he can address the question of pederasty and pedophilia as being possible fields of liberation, not only because the names themselves speak only of the desire for children, but not he desire of children, but because he is willing to cast people in general as narrow-minded villains, when they are guilty of what most members of the status quo are guilty of: a lack of imagination. It is unforgivable that a person who wants to espouse a revolutionary cause is unable to understand this. Omar Bozeman 28 Quint Avenue #15 Allston, MA. 02134 Cuba is not leftist Anarchy, I'm responding to the OGB News Service's article "`Peace for Cuba': The Repressive Left in Action," printed in your Summer, 1992 issue. Communism in the Soviet Union was totalitarian, and communism in modern Cuba is fascism. Both political ideologies are right-winged, or radically conservative, the latter much more than the former. In the former Soviet Union, wasn't all political power, including decisions involving the means of production, invested in its government? If the Soviet Union had truly been communist, wouldn't the opposite have been true? In Cuba, all political power is invested in a dictator, Fidel Castro. All dictatorships are fascist, are they not? Is free and independent thought permitted in Cuba? Were I Cuban, could I publicly criticize the government without being arrested or even killed? According to the author(s), "What she (Ms. Avila, a WBAI radio producer) found (in Cuba) was a system held in place by political repression and government informers, repressing not just gays...., but also those who had attempted to work within the system to create a socialism where freedom of speech and criticism of bureaucratic mismanagement and elitism were not a crime." "She saw numerous cases of repression," including "a Marxist scholar who was imprisoned for writing a criticism of elitism in the upper echelons of the Communist Party." These passages certainly answer my questions. This is reminiscent of Nazi Germany. Since Nazi Germany is referred to as fascist and radically right-winged, why isn't Cuba? It irritates me whenever countries like Cuba are referred to as leftist (I only used the Soviet Union as a further example of what I consider "The Communist Misconception"). The left is liberal, the right is conservative. I always considered references to modern communism as left-winged or leftist a fallacy. Theoretical or pure communism (which has never existed) is left-winged, but modern communism is not. Sincerely yours, John Galliers Boynton Beach, FL. Alberto Franceschini has no credibility Dear comrades of Anarchy, We cannot get out of sending you this letter, after we have read in issue #32 [Spring '92] an interview with Alberto Franceschini, which previously appeared - as you said - in the French journal Le Brise-Glace. We don't know if you are aware of who this person is and what his role has been inside the Italian revolutionary movement. Otherwise, you must know that: -he is an ex-leader of the Red Brigades (and this is well-known); -he denied his organization, armed struggle (in the wide sense of the term), and the revolutionary movement a long time ago; -in order to get personal benefits (as his release from prison, as it's occurred - many of his former comrades, who also denied armed struggle, did not get the same benefits, evidently because there was not much they could offer to the justice system) he collaborated with judges and various prelates. And he had the nerve to despise the collaborators, look who's talking! -he pointed out the hiding-places of weapons and munitions to the authorities; -when he was a prisoner, the State sent him along to various Italian special prisons in order to persuade other political pris- oners to imitate him, to surrender weapons (often they kicked him out!). These are some of his dirty tricks that are public knowledge, so you can imagine the hidden rest. After these preliminaries, we would say that we don't mean to judge the choices made a long time ago by many ex-revolutionaries, withdrawing from the fight and criticizing their own former political activities; everybody is master of his own existence - yes, but of his own existence. When this "self-criticism" is addressed to the judges, in order to get some benefits, or, and it's worse, when one tries to involve all the movement in his own giving up - making up alibis and a new life, useful especially when one is set free - this is an oppor- tunist and rotten attitude that we can't accept and justify. The aim of these hired people is to represent the new political rank, between prisoners before then and in the movement, and they are hired by power in order to point out the potential revolutionary focus. In this way they help power to prevent and repress potential uprisings. We don't understand how it is that the opportunist criticism of dictatorial organizations made by Franceschini & co. are of inter- est to anarchists. Innumerable anarchist writings have been made about "fighting parties," in Italy and elsewhere. These writings criticized all the "fighting parties," that always choke off the anarchist side of the movement, hampering its propagation. And this happens not because these organizations are `fighting', but because they are `parties': i.e. dictatorial, specialist, completely cut off from the rest of society - whatever Mr. Franceschini may say about it. We don't want to enter upon the interview because we don't want to give credibility to such a person, even if we think what he says in the interview is doubtful, without considering his `remem- brances' with police informer effects. If one wants to do an analysis of that period or to criticize a kind of organization, please don't resort to such people whose only aim is to gain the necessary credibility in order to re-enter the real revolutionary movement through the window, after they were thrown out of the door a long time ago - and maybe, by the way, plugging the last book written! We as anarchists, though with strong and still continuing criti- cisms of the political organizations like the Red Brigades, keep on appreciating the dignified silence of the fighting militants who did not sell themselves to the enemy. And that is without considering all the prisoners, who weren't members of any dictatorial organization, that are still in prison. Many pages have been written about this matter, and many others might be written. We hope that these pages would not be written by ex-revolutionaries and betrayers. For now, we point out that an anarchist journal, or any other revolutionary journal, can't so lightly help to give credibility to surrender, whatever may be the reasons to do it. It's very important to think about the damages that doing so causes to the struggle and to us. Hoping that our bad English doesn't cause incomprehension, we send you our anarchist regards. M.S. & S.M., Milano, Italy A masculinist response to "A Feminist" Dear C.A.L., I preferred your new Summer '92 format to the old format. Your magazine is a great source of enlightenment. The letter from "A Feminist" annoyed me. Like many feminists, she seeks to blame white males for her unhappiness. This view divides men against women. Her chief complaints are that women are underpaid and that pornography is the theory of rape. Women are underpaid because they will accept lower wages. When women flooded the job market, the supply of laborers grew faster than the demand for labor. That caused the price of labor to go down. Men have to support families. Even today, they are the primary bread winners. They won't work for a wage they can't live on. Their wives, however, will work eighty hours a week to earn enough money for a new car or some other frivolity. Therefore, statistically, women earn less than men. It's not a patriarchal conspiracy. It's simple economics. A Feminist needs to blame her materialistic sisters who put their kids in day care to keep up with the Joneses. Her second point about pornography is equally invalid. Men just like to have pretty pictures of women to look at while they masturbate. I know. I'm a man, she's not. Anti-pornography laws are just the precedent needed to suppress other publications, like Anarchy magazine. Sincerely, A Masculinist, Raleigh, NC. New Art Riot Anarchy, Hello? Is everyone out there listening to The Manic Street Preachers yet? Please print this & please tell your readers to start with New Art Riot. Everything else is just brain dead. Love, A Terrorist, NYC, NY. Talking to men Dear Anarchy, This is more of a short - after reading Feral Faun's response (Fall '92) - than a letter. Look mate: I can't vouch for other women, but this is what I want - tell me my mind is beautiful, woo me with poetry, learn how to seduce, wear eyeshadow. I am talking to men out there - if you wanna get the girl, celebrate her ability to think. Sincerely, Slashing for Dignity, NYC, NY. Huffy about porn In your Summer '92 issue of Anarchy some person got all huffy about pornography [see p.70, "Porn is the theory..."]. While i myself look at the track record of porn with a critical eye; i am able also to understand that pornography is only a method of communication or/and art. By the examples i have been allowed to see, i've noted what looks like exploitation, and what strikes my conditioning as negative. At the same time, upon 1st and 2nd hand experience, i've seen what the need to make a profit does to communication and/or art. But porn in and of itself has no mind, it is only a tool, like a gun or water. Only another force can wield it to do harm. Significant questions should instead be delivered, i think (i.e. should porn come under some kind of restrictions?). Reasonable questions towards usefulness instead of towards emotional either/or tendency. Basically, i think pornography is an art form. And in America it is similar to much of the more tolerated art in its purely topical interests. Should we blanketly prohibit all porn or judge it on an individual basis? Myself, i am able to visualize that so-called "child pornography" could evolve away from its adult porn norms and become not only a depiction but a method towards imagination, ideas, experimentation, and human analysis - as form of artistic discovery.... The author's main tactic against porn as a whole, probably didn't realize how easily other words could fit into their monologue (or did they?). Use `art' in the space: "art is not about expression - it's about power. How can you tell it's about power? It's about who gets to look at who's body parts without asking; it's about who gets to decide the dominant images in our society - about who controls the art industry (guess which class?); who it is created for (art magazines are for investors aren't they?). Ask anyone what they think art is; they'll probably tell you one thing but leave out the part about artists who suffer depressed alcoholic lives...." A blanket, emotion-grabbing judgement can be questioned quite easily if thought about a little. And while individuals' negative experiences should not go silenced, nor should they be more equal than individuals with positive pornographic experiences. The author goes on to say things about how they have `nowhere' to go for a mutual respect of their insights, analysis, or feelings...i think that's only half of the story, and emotionally I want to scream right back as i can list all the constant TV talk shows, magazine articles, newspaper stories, letters to editors, etc., etc. which speak, speak, bolster and speak about Victimism (oh no, not another `ism'). But i catch myself; those are pretty superficial and centered on sensationalism and money squandering...but i put my nose down when victimism (that victim- hood which is socially recognized as able to be a victim) thinks it can have the entire picture all by itself; that it, alone, is entitled to understanding...while those also victims (but not at this time fitting within the acceptable boundaries)-such as the silenced prisoners of consensual intergenerational sex - can be damned for all the fuck you care. Such unfashionable victims, underage minors as well as adults, who've been sentenced by today's dogma to lives of suffering that have no place to be heard. Yet you with your mainstream spotlight speak of not having enough.... But what ground is being gotten by our finger-shaking parades? For you to know my anger may enlighten your tunnel vision, but the more important thing is that we can join as angry people together. By realizing that porn in and of itself is not an evil, and as well that it is the mindset behind the method and not a people, is to find a cooperative and constructive solution to what ails all of us. Blame only perpetuates extremes that swing a pendulum from one side to another. The `evil' that blocks us is not, i believe, made up of tools (pornography, guns, or water) but of thought processes which i call mindsets. The same mindset process is i believe behind the `solution' that allows war to perpetuate, racism to function, or kids forced to attend piano lessons. As mindsets aligning with anarchist freethought, we should be among the first ones to come forth from the mudslinging with a ray of hope. Groups of people who can't help not fitting into today's social dogma are not the block that pesters justice and `freedom', but the mindsets and attitudes within them. Blame solves no problems, but enlightened cooperation in a mutually beneficial arena does. C.D., "somewhere in Portugal" Valuable time Dear editor, It seems Anarchy, the journal of desire armed, has decided to join forces with the rest of the mainstream media in its vilification of political correctness. This is the only thing that can explain the exceedingly stupid `advertisement' which parodies politically correct use of language in the anti-civilization issue. What do you suggest we do? Either you call people by how you value them or you call them by how others call them. The others which the parody seemed to agree with are those who call blacks niggers, because they lack status, and women fucks, because they're sex objects. Congratulations on your integrity. As for the rest of the issue, I remain unimpressed. Anti-civism is plainly stupid. There is no way to feed all the people of Earth, if we are to go back to the trees. Either you wish a massive die- out, and you're a Nazi and we know how to treat you, or you wish people to receive their due, and primitivism goes out the window. Michael William's two essays, one a straw man and the other just plain griping with no solution. The first, on the incredibly bad art-work of a local artist and the politically correct reaction to it, was a straw man against the feminists who saw fit not to show it. The beef of these women was not against only primitivism (what William focusses on) but primitivism and stereotypes together. Then he contradicts himself by basically implying that these feminists were censoring the art-work by not showing it. According to this same `logic' William's favorite local book-shop, La Librairie Alternative, is censoring Marx and Hitler by not selling (at incredibly low prices, admittedly) Capital and Mein Kampf. Plainly, in a capitalist society, if a book-seller doesn't want to sell a book, for whatever reason, then she/he need not sell it. I recommend Atlas Shrugged, by the incredibly dumb Ayn Rand, for an understanding of this aspect of capitalism. (I'm thinking here of character Hank Reardon's treatment of those on his property who spoke things he didn't approve of.) Then there's William on bicycling. Perhaps we'd best not do anything to attempt to alleviate pollution. After all, cycling is oppressive. Right. Then there's Zerzan on the origins of civilization. Note that a not-so-careful reading reveals that our weirdest avant-gardist isn't able to get any anthropologist to corroborate his most interesting theses, namely, that language and time are oppressive. This is probably because, as a cursory glance would reveal, these are part of human nature and if, as Zerzan's essay indicates, the human brain is the same now as it was in primitive times (as it may or may not be), then the primitives would have language and time. Also, anthropologists have yet to unearth a culture which lacks these fundamentals of being human, at least as Zerzan presents his case. And I guess Zerzan goes ahead and begs the question and says "See what a corrupting influence civilization has?" It's explained by Douglas Kellner's Jean Baudrillard that what Baudrillard is doing is science fiction. I would suggest that this is what Zerzan is doing and I would also suggest that he either write for science fiction magazines, and give up on anarchism, or he follow his own ideology and shut up. I read Perlman's whole book once already and I found it in- teresting. But, as I see it, there ain't no way to get that kind of society without a mass die-off. Thank you for your valuable time. Sincerely, G.T., Point-Claire, Qu‚bec Fundamentally evil Dear friends, [...] There's this old but persistent objection to anarchy: who's going to build the sewer system? And what's to stop some neigh- borhood bully setting himself up as a warlord, or racist gangs just hanging people, etc. These objections rely on the assumption that once released from an elaborate written law code enforced by violence or the threat of violence, people will naturally refuse to perform the less glamorous tasks, and instead go around looting and killing. There's the assumption that human nature is fundamentally evil, or at least selfish, hence we need a strong law system to force people to restrain their destructive impulses. Some anar- chists take a more optimistic view of human nature, suggesting the less that (official) morality is imposed by violence, the more that innate human morality will manifest itself. I'd like to agree with this latter view, but it does require a leap of faith, considering the current state of affairs in the world. So I think to meet this common objection, to overcome the problem it represents, is going to require something like a profound re- orientation in the minds and lifestyles of the majority of humans, so that we become accustomed to the exercise of our own self- generated morality. In fact, the transformation required is such that I could call it spiritual (in a non-Theistic sense). How do we go about all this? The anti-religious tone of some of your cartoons, articles, and especially letters seems to stem from that process of intense symbolic repudiation so characteristic of people still struggling to break free of the influence of some (usually institutional) aspect of religion. It's a pity that religion (institutions, doctrines, prescribed answers) gets mixed up with spirituality. In my years meandering in Asia, England and America, I've met a few (a very few) people of advanced spirituality, and without exception I have found them to be, in their personal mental lives, true anarchists, recognizing the fiction of governmental worldviews, just as they recognize the merely expedient nature of dogma. They may or may not be `politically' active in a con- ventional sense. I guess I'm mainly saying that, hidden within some strands of some religious traditions, there are physical and mental techniques which have the effect of demonstrating at all levels of consciousness the pure arbitrariness of all the personal and social paradigms which limit and control, even define, our sense of freedom. For me, Anarchy is the attempt to break free of limiting paradigms. Also, for me, spiritual practice is the attempt to break through limiting paradigms. I realize this might come across like New Age babble, or like I'm trying to sell something, but I'm not. Only suggest. The conscious mind is only a small part of what we are, and I suggest that we have to derive strength from deeper within ourselves in order to pit ourselves against the intimidating weaponry of the current incarnation of the capitalist system. Otherwise, many of us will despair, give up, grow bitter, or become addicted to obsessive (but shallow) anti-establishment postures. And in the end, have no answer when someone says: "Anarchy? But what would stop people from killing each other?" E.R., Goleta, CA. What's wrong with capitalism? Question: What's wrong with capitalism? Answer: An accounting temp. agency just called me. They had an accounts payable assignment for me. They called the bus company to make certain I could get there. They got an OK from the company so they could pay me $7/hour. They double-checked with me to be certain I would be happy with all this. I assured them I just got a haircut yesterday, have suitable attire (includes white shirt, shined shoes and necktie), and would be on time Monday morning. They called the company back to let them know all was set, and some greedy asshole at the company decided they didn't want to pay the rate, and wanted to know if I would do the job for $6/hour. Aside from the fact I usually get $10/hr. for this type of work, I told them I would never do anything so idiotic as an A/P job (electronic A/P processing, processing all the salesmen's reports, photocopy- ing, and filing, and who knows what else) for $6/hr. I did thank them for making it understandable to me how Dane County has a 3.2% unemployment rate. Of course it is true that the weak and disorganized here are letting this type of corporate shit take advantage of them, and that's how you get a meaningless figure like a 3.2% unemployment rate. This example from real life is being sent to you in the hope that it will encourage you and your friends to destroy what is left of global criminally insane corporate monoculture, and get back to life here as it was intended to be lived, in balance. Do it! C.S., Madison, WI. Deceived mentally Dear Anarchos, To those of you that are anarchs & trying to be spiritual and/or into new age thought/ metaphysics you might run across a book called The Lion Path, either on your own or mentioned in a book called Linda Goodman's Star Signs. If you are not psychic (don't have visions, etc.), then I would say get on it, it's the quickest way up to a better world. If you are psychic, I must warn you: you'll be very possibly attacked/deceived mentally, physically & spiritually by an evil entity (the worst authoritarian you'll ever wanna meet), yes they exist. I know. It's why the world is the way it is. If you choose it, do everything you can to guard yourself. An excellent book that deals w/this subject is called Psychic Self- Defense by Dion Fortune. There are other books I'm sure but I have- n't run across them yet. I've been attacked by the garbage for 2« years now, & most intensely for the last 7 months. I can answer any questions you might have, if any. Thanks for listening. Please print my name w/the address. Chris L. Moore 316 E. Locust #2 Bloomington, IL. 61701-3155 I'm all alone out here Greetings and salutations anarchist comrades! I'm an anarchist from the San Francisco Bay Area, being held a P.O.W. in this prehistoric, fascist, racist Arizona police state. I'm doing 15 calendar years for burglary because I refused to turn "state's evidence" and send my cohorts to prison (take the "easy way out"). So I became the "enemy of the state," and they got immunity from prosecution in exchange for their `cooperation'. I was only 18 years old at the time, and didn't know they could convict you on the uncorroborated testimony of an accomplice. I learned the hard way. That was in 1982, and I've been learning ever since. Aside from an 18-month `furlough' that I took as an escaped fugitive, I've been locked up in this redneck wasteland of a state all this time. I'm something of a "management problem" to these people, and they've got me permanently housed in their supermaximum-security control unit, in virtual solitary confinement. I haven't seen any daylight for 2 years now, and my release date is November 1998. I am considered to be a "security risk," and a threat to the institution, because I'm totally dedicated to smashing the state - any way I can! I refuse to `work', refuse to `program', cooperate, submit to urinalysis testing, or anything else they expect us to conform to. They persecute me because I have very strong spiritual, ethical, and personal convictions that come from the heart, and I will not violate. I believe in the Old School principles, which they are trying to eradicate through insidious psychological operations - by breeding a `snitch' mentality in the new breed, racial discord, disinformation, etc. Divide and rule. Unfortu- nately, the majority of these so-called `convicts' in this prison system are so damn ignorant and stupid that they actually do The Man's job for him. They even help build new prisons, to lock more people up, for slave wages. Creature comforts, selfishness, and egotism have replaced ideology in here. I'm all alone out here, and am doing "hard time" so to speak. I have virtually no one that I can relate to in terms of ideology, and all of my dealings with my fellow prisoners in here are fairly superficial. I have no family, and am totally destitute; the state saw to it that I lost all of my worldly possessions. These pigs don't provide us with anything, and make us purchase whatever we need with our own money. I'm having a hard time just getting basic necessities for myself, let alone being able to mail-order any literature to study and better myself with, or buy some food from the commissary here. I am a strict vegetarian, and believe me, that's no small feat in prison, when you don't have the food that you need available to you. I am hoping there are some people out there who care enough to help me out. Donations of stamps and/or money orders - even five dollars or so - would be greatly appreciated, and used primarily to further my `subversive' educational endeavors and to purchase personal necessities, writing materials, etc. If a handful of people were to help me out with just a few dollars a piece, or pass the hat around within their respective groups, my life would be a whole lot better in here. I might even be able to have something of a `Christmas'. Moral support is greatly appreciated as well, and your correspondence, flyers, photocopied articles, etc., are most welcome; I will definitely write back, but need stamps to do so. I am a veteran convict, and have a wealth of knowledge to share with others, especially when it comes to "an ounce of prevention," i.e. security, helping people avoid making needless mistakes and getting themselves busted. I would also appreciate any information, addresses, resources, and contacts that may be of use to me to get something going for myself and generate my own income. I would really like to pull my own weight and earn my own way if at all possible. If anyone can help me to help myself, please write...or just write to just write! Gregory Waleski #47190 Arizona State Prison POB 4000 Florence, AZ. 85232 Anti-porn questions Questions for the Editors and readers of Anarchy: Power, here, means exercising a relationship where one (some) is (are) made to comply to another (others). Many of the following questions can be credited to C. MacKinnon's analysis in "Toward a Feminist Theory of the State." (Don't panic over the word state [by which she seems to imply only social structure]. She says feminists don't currently have a theory of social structure, only that it should not dominate life. There's a good chance that many anarchists will find this very radical book enlightening.) Isn't anarchism an ideology in that it has at least one tenet: power should be opposed? Why is porn, essentially male? Why does porn show women bound, women battered and defiled, women killed. Even soft porn shows women accessible, have-able, wanting to be taken and used by men? Isn't this inconsistent with mutuality in society? Don't the essential areas porn deals with suggest that it is con- structing a kind of sexuality whose major theme is power? Is power OK if it can be classified as erotica? Is porn harmless fantasy? Or, does it tie dominance to pleasure? Aren't women (and children) sexually objectified by porn? Doesn't objectification mean having a social meaning imposed that sets the stage for sexual use? If anarchists can see through the state's legitimized coercion being rationalized as consent, isn't there a parallel with porn? Is it sexually undominated women that are consenting to make porn? Is the appearance of consent concealing the reality of force? Do women (in the male dominated society) control access to their bodies? If they do, why is abortion a social problem? Why do normal men viewing porn become more aroused to scenes of rape than to scenes of explicit, but not expressly violent sex, even if the women are shown hating it (MacKinnon, p.144, note 51)? Doesn't this observation support the notion "porn is the theory of rape?" Why do victim's reports of rape look a lot like what porn says is sex? Is this porn-rape connection because men are inherently disposed to sex-power; or are social constructions involved? Is it male anarchist desire armed that prefers the depictions of porn to those of love and affection? Can't porn be about power, not about (mutual) sex and still be about sex (the eroticization of domination)? If porn were recognized as a form of social power that needed to be defended against, because of its destructive effects on women, would it be OK for women to seek legal protections, just as anarchists do when absolutely necessary? What does Bob Black have against radical feminists in general (called know-nothings) and MacKinnon in particular (demeaned as a Popess)? Isn't it possible that anti-feminist anarchists suffer from blind spots as a result of their (unwitting?) enjoyment of sexual power? Doesn't understanding porn have to get past liberalism's legal tradition of neutralization through abstraction from the realities of power, a tradition that has authoritatively defined porn as not about women but about sex, hence about morality, and as not about acts or practices, but about ideas? Isn't it radical feminism whose concern with power is first political, not moral? If pedophilia can't be condemned morally (as Jason says there are no universal moral laws), does this mean it can't be condemned at all, even by a power analysis? Do antifeminist anarchists support the liberal argument that porn is free speech? Isn't it possible, in a society of inequality, that free speech doesn't help discover the truth so much as it allows the powerful to impress their view upon a despairing acquiescence providing the appearance of consent even as speech (in power) is using that power to make its vision into reality, which then passes, objectively, for truth? Doesn't porn, as free speech, thus silence the radical feminist political critique of porn as power- sex? If no empirical evidence can undermine the position in power (because what can count as evidence is prescribed by the powerful), isn't an anti-power change in consciousness necessary and isn't this more than an individual undertaking? Isn't such a change the kind of thing dissidents (feminists, anarchists) might undertake communally without being condemned as ideological? Isn't it possible that some anarchist men "just don't get it?" Maybe antifeminist anarchists are hiding in a privatized liberal- ism when it comes to pedophilia and porn - scared to tell other men what they can and cannot have sexual access to, because (in the typical liberal rationalization) if you do not let them have theirs, they might not let you have yours? Isn't it more difficult to discern sexual freedom against a background, a standard, of sexual coercion than antifeminist anarchists are allowing? Why is it, for example, that what feminist politics identifies as central in women's subordination - the eroticization of dominance and submission - a genre of anarchist morality finds relatively harmless or defends as affirmatively valuable as freedom? What, specifically is being defended in the antifeminist positions as higher than the efforts of women to be rid of male dominance? Can sexual freedom extend to support for the union of children to have children when clearly they are not up to the responsibilities? Do anarchists have to allow social power to exist, because the alternative would be censorship - an interference with freedom? Are all rules (structured relationships) archist? What about structure that reflects voluntarily shared values in a communal social consciousness? Does social freedom mean one community can justifiably decide to dominate another? Can communities of shared values justifiably ostracize? Is the fact that women do not seem very interested in anarchism, just possibly, due to its failure to support (wholeheartedly) women's recognition of the social destructiveness of sex as a division of power? Isn't ideological normalizing involved in anar- chist antifeminism? W.B., Edgewood, IA. Jason wonders: Anti-anti-porn questions For your information, most anarchists, I would guess, don't oppose `power' itself (in the usual senses of the word). They oppose hierarchical power, in order that the general populace might em- power itself, rather than remaining relatively powerless. Though I haven't read her work, I find it impossible to believe that C. MacKinnon doesn't really mean the state when she says "the state." I'm assuming you're speaking of the infamous anti-porn feminist who has attempted to impose her censorious, authoritarian views on the rest of us through the enactment of repressive laws in several states and Canada! What's she going to have to say to anar- chists? Go out and get more laws passed to restrict people's ability to communicate even further, to give the cops even more excuses to crack down on sex-positive radicals, and to enforce the narrow sex-negative views of anti-porn feminists? Give us a break! Her convictions have as much in common with anarchists as Phyllis Schlafly's do. Your enthusiasm for feminist charlatans like MacKinnon makes me wonder. Here are some questions for you: Why are anti-porn activists so afraid of sex and depictions of sexual activity? Why is it that though the vast bulk of porn shows unbound, unbattered, undefiled human beings, anti-porn zealots insist that virtually every sexual depiction in our culture shows the opposite? Why don't anti-porn fanatics ever note that women are depicted bound, battered, tortur- ed, humiliated, degraded and defiled far more frequently in murder mysteries or Hollywood movies than they are in mainstream porn? Is it because this would prove incompatible with the bizarre anti-porn dogma that "porn is the theory of rape"? Isn't there something insane about thinking that there is a `par- allel' between depictions of sexual bodies and how-to-rape instruc- tion manuals? If not, should we also consider the parallels between depictions of people eating food and cannibalism how-to-manuals? Should there be laws against depicting people eating on the grounds that all such depictions symbolize ritual cannibalism? Why do a portion of the wide variety of pleasurable sexual expe- riences look so often like what porn depicts? Does this observation support the notion that "porn is the theory of sex"? (As if sex needed a theory!) Is the pleasure-porn connection because people are inherently disposed to take pleasure in sex and depictions of sexual bodies? Is it anti-porn masochism that prefers playing the victim to living freely and pleasurably? Is this why anti-porn repressiveness engenders anti-erotic, hierarchical power? If anti- porn legislation were recognized as a form of hierarchical power that needed to be defended against, because of its attacks on human sexuality, would it be OK for people to ridicule it and flaunt it? Is the anti-porn position dependent on misrepresenting itself as the only feminist position on pornography? If not, why do so many anti-porn spokespeople insist on misleading or lying about the fact that the feminist movement has been split in two by the explosive conflicts between sex-positive and sex-negative (anti-porn) perspectives? Is the fact that the anti-porn movement has failed to attract a significant following in the anarchist milieu, just possibly due to its failure to support (even half-heartedly) women and men's aspirations for sexual freedom? Is the pretense of anti- porn activists speaking for all of "feminist politics" - as if all feminists agreed - any less reprehensible than the pretense of the U.S. president speaking for all Americans when he announced that there was no resistance movement during the Gulf War? We all know what the president was trying to hide; what are the anti-porn feminists trying so hard to hide? Why do so many people write letters to anarchist periodicals which advocate authoritarian and repressive courses of action? Is it because they want to be able to complain about being victimized by the inevitable critical responses? Is there some reason why anti- porn dogmatists can't try thinking for themselves for a change? Or are they just too worn out from restating their puerile dogmas again and again and again and again and again and again...? Independent state of Qwa-Ba-Diwa Dear Editor, I am writing to inform you and your readers of the declaration of the Independent State of Qwa-Ba-Diwa, which comprises the second largest old-growth rainforest in the World and nearly 3500km2 of land. This beautiful and rare ecosystem is being threatened with extinction at the hands of Big Business Clearcut Logging Companies. Since no treaty has ever been signed with the residing peoples, according to the British North America Act neither the Federal nor the Provincial Governments have legal jurisdiction there. The native peoples were expropriated from their land by the Police, for the State on behalf of Big Business. Now, since the Native peoples are faced with imminent annihilation, the result of genocidal policies enacted by the State, these people are returning from the concentration camp to their ancestral home. They have pledged non- violence, but they will not leave their home at any cost. Human Rights and Liberation organizations have been mobilized on the Island to help with the cause. We are now working on informing the international community of this issue which affects each of us. I will be joining my new people there soon to help defend the last 3% of old-growth remaining on a once overgrown island, the largest island in North America. Their society of which I am a part is matrilineal, communitarian and agrarian-based. Voluntary coop- eration and mutual aid are practised here where elsewhere they are only theories in a dreamer's mind. The struggle of the Qwa-Ba-Diwa and other Native peoples is allied to the struggle of oppressed peoples everywhere. Native Liberation movements are involved, the international media has been informed as with Amnesty Int'l and the General Secretary of the United Nations. Legally, we feel that this is an airtight case. However, with the Police, State, Media and Big Business interests at stake, we may see unjustified State-sanc- tioned violence against these people. We hope that we may be able to count on the support of the international community should violence of this type break out. By working on this we also hope to increase and strengthen the flow of aid between struggles, as we feel that the time has come to turn up the heat on the system which is designed to kill the planet. Organizations that one would never have seen together a year ago now recognize the fundamental contradiction of capitalism - unlimited growth from a finite source, and the lengths that the hegemonic groups are willing to go in order to preserve the order. They refuse to admit that capitalism is falling apart at the seams, but the people are reading between the lies and connecting the dots and are beginning to see what lies up ahead. We must bring our economies to a stabilized level, not sustainable development, but a sustainable system which is both non-capitalist and non-Statist, if we are to be able to look beyond the next 50 years. If you would like more information, or would like to lend a hand, contact: John Shafer Concerned Citizens for Aboriginal Rights 71 Menzies St. Victoria, B.C. V8V 2G3 Canada Independent State of Qwa-Ba-Diwa Terry DeLine #1203-850 Bidwell St. Vancouver, B.C. V6G 2J8 Canada Yours in the Unity of Struggle, S.D., Victoria, B.C.