2016
Dec 
24

Personalization

Some people want to personalize the more things as possible…

No need to go out in a light we understand each and everyone good and in the dark, with no personalization, but those who didn’t have the luck to hide their “identities”, because the system trapped them, they fallen, in the hands of the state, institution, analytics . Identity and personality traps. Property too.

Today I praise the possibility to have a space to express myself.

I have no bosses,nor masters upon me.

I can not believe that some people  can possibly be angry about it- if someone takes their words from social media, and spread it around, without actually referring on their origin. What do they want for them Nobel prize? Maybe, after Bob Dylan getting Nobel Prize for literature, the next step is to award someone for their facebook statuses,with the Nobel Prize for literature?

It is about authorship, and publishing rights, and intellectual property issue. But how can someone call it seriously intellectual property, facebook statuses?

I am sad today, cause I read in the papers that my colleague and friend fall in jail in the UK. for delusional psychoanalytical praxis.?!?!

I am thinking about finding contact and informations, some address to write him. They accuse him as a  thief.

 

 

 

 

 

2016
Dec 
11

About anonymity, publicity and rationality

 

Why getting anonymous, private security online without publishing your name and refusing to reference to yourself as an author but still wanting to write and publish, to participate in public discourse and debates?

I have difficulties every time I do something, to put the reference, to sign the material and put Geo-location. In today society people are usually referring to themselves as their names, or location, or members of some organizations. With this usually going a lot of things and consequences that we were or were not counting on: they search or get recognition,they feel worthy of honor, and get recognition from The Other, or “big-other”…and also a lot of things came into play, like you got defined or predefined yourself with some terms that socially determinate you…I believe that I do not want to determinate or predetermine myself in that way because I feel that I am not closed person who appreciate this or any kind or forms of bureaucratic self, and existing social structures. Maybe its a way to stay open to the fluids, and truth… and use your mind, in technology world that does not require to sign your articles, as finding  usual social convention in “outernet”(out of digital world) of journalism, and academics.

Every time and every “project” or action I participated required some kind of signature, or mapping. The ones that I refused or didn’t have to sign are autonomous and self-governed projects with general common goal, and my alleviated. Every single thing that I had to sign, even with nickname or location loses for me a sense of universality and is helping pushing up the system personalized self alienated and imaginary. I believe I want to keep this praxis of anonymity as long as I can and as long as I don’t find a form in the outer-world that I can identify myself, at the basic level.

The other question is what I write and want other people to read, and what I don’t want them to read…and where. Often I write to myself, and when thinking how something will sound to other people, I am writing different. Addressing writings to the other people or signing it has different connotations. I guess my philosophy background has a lot of influences in this thing as well. I want to mention here that my master thesis was on the question of public and private mind. It is the reason, maybe for something that may look as absence of productivity from the point of view of usual conventional selves, from the system. What I write, I want someone to read, but not everyone, so that is why I choose to whom I will send it and why (for the review, and critics most likely).

Problem – not to be understood is usual consequence of talking to the public ( when you use specific professional language and terms). People who do not appreciate philosophy, to them this will most like look like  too ambitious, or non-realistic, idealistic, dark, or even they will not bother to read it and valuate it.

Writing to me is kind of joy. I enjoy in writing, in reading and language itself. When I write something, I don’t have to share it with anyone, or just with a few (If I am lucky to have a live person for conversation). When I write or read something that I like, I enjoy looking at that sentence, and reading it…I want to keep it in my mind so that it can make echoes to my deep self and to the universe. Telling it to the people it becomes trivial. Its like every truth: the ancient problem of knowledge and opinion – γνώσις alethea, episteme and doxa (δόξα).

For me, also language is poetic. False rationality in science came into power in society and wants to determine the language. I appreciate the notion of rationality, just, I think that is wrong understood in the most of its practical use. I accept Lacanian notion of rationality.

2016
May 
25

Revolutionary situation, what is that?

There are ways that you can fight for yourself, against bureaucratic structures and rules of making decisions.

Also family relations, educational system, as a part of conservative, patriarchal, autocratic structures challenge us on a daily basis.

We nead to bear in mind to act positive and active, not reactive to the system, in a sense of Deleuze, as he writes in Nietzsche and Philosophy. Affirmation is affirmation of will, independent from the system, that brakes structures and causality of machines. It is positive to our own demands, supporting individual intents, that are trapped in causal chain, social structures.

Some say that to agitate and propagate revolution must correspond with revolutionary situation. But what makes revolutionary situation? It  is a matter of class, and viewpoint of subject that speaks this words…Is he speaking from comfortable zone, leftist from the armchair, and his experience and contact with revolutionary situations is merely oblique? He does not see revolutionary situations, neither participate in them. This phenomenology of social developments flow from individual experience knowledge and observations. It happens in the eye of the subject, is the eye open, or it refuses to see?Does exploitation and class division not providing enough reasons to fight? 

1paris

2016
May 
21

Thought on individual anarchism and organization

What is individual anarchism? How can one person change something if is not organized with others in formal or informal organization, or at least in a group?

If you throw one stone, it’s a punishable offence. If 1,000 stones are thrown, it’s political action. If you set a car on fire, it’s a punishable offence. If hundreds of cars are set on fire, it’s political action. Protest is when I say I don’t agree with something. Resistance is when I ensure that things with which I disagree no longer take place.(Ulrike Meinhof)

What makes difference between an individual acts that are not only punishable and recognized as criminal acts and political acts? For sure it is not only about  the massive resonance of one action, but also the target and purpose.

One person can make damage to the system and also can be anti-sistem. Everyone can be subversive element of society. Every “I” can be subversive element. What makes difference between anarchism and other forms of revolutionary organizations, is not only type of organizing, but also that anarchism recognizes individualism as a form of organization…and it can be military, too.

There are situations where if you are working class, and on your place of employment there is no organization, you are left alone in the hands of system.

 

2016
May 
7

Pathetic of remembrance or saving from oblivion?

 

It is the question are we too old when we start remembering and researching the past, or it was always part of us we bear like a cargo.

All the stories that means something to us, are kind of “genealogy of the subject”…we are dragged already in the maze of our own past, memorized stories, whether our own or people close to us.

Life goes fast and we are living on this earth immersed in the events, and part of us is always looking back, in to the past. Past has this privileged status over future, because we can look at it, we can see the picture in our mind, of what we experienced, or heard, or we can look at the photography. This process involves our imagination.  (Whether we experienced or just heard about some events. )

Photography is mimicking (mimesis)  our memory (nemesis).  A process that is primarily mechanical, involves mechanic work of photo camera, and later work in a dark chamber, with chemicals, works on the principle of mechanics and chemistry. 

The images detached from every aspect of life fuse in a common stream in which the unity of this life can no longer be reestablished. Reality considered partially unfolds, in its own general unity, as a pseudo-world apart, an object of mere contemplation. The specialization of images of the world is completed in the world of the autonomous image, where the liar has lied to himself. The spectacle in general, as the concrete inversion of life, is the autonomous movement of the non-living.

Guy Debord 1967, Society of the Spectacle,

Separation Perfected

New age obsession with photography is kind of Nemesis and living virtually in the past and  trying to memorize and remember everything, from our past, personally and universal. But the ways of this remembrance are telling us that present is changing the way past looks to us. Deeper relation with history is motivated with present. Why we want to remember and what to remember?

War and memory

There is sort of fetishism about the history, of some events that represents to us big events in human history. We want to remember them because the lessons we can learn about them…I recently started to be interested for the past, and started to research systematically parts of classic history and also less knows history.

It is well known that anarchists are against wars (imperial wars) and that they (some of them) only supports class war.  All wars that were raging in history were wars for profit and power. Anarchists here have a constant anti-war orientation…In this wars upper classes were ready to sacrifice their own sons only for interests of their ideology: profit, glory and power. But we, anarchist say that in wars the poor people are the ones that losses the most…What is glorious about wars? My great grandfather was fighter in WWI, in Thessaloníki Front and survivor of this horrors, as well as the horrors of the WWII. His father died in Balkan war, and his grave is not known…near their family house in the mountain family build a small monument for him. From childhood I was listening the stories from my grandmother and grandfather about WWII, and partisans, and WWI…and other stories from the past.

My grandfather lived 90 years, he survived horrors of WWI, and WWII, like many people of this generations. Also I grow up on my grandmother’s stories about her father…( he was solder in Thessaloníki Front in Greece, was awarded the Albanian medal, (“albanska spomenica”) after the war he worked as a border guard on the Bulgarian-Serbian border, and in some way it is the reason why our family was saved in WWII when Bulgarian solders wanted to burn their house down, because they were hiding wounded partisans…One solder saw the picture, in the house of my grandfather together with man that he recognized, that was his father! Turned out that they worked together between the wars on the border…my grandfather and the father of this solder that came to burn their house. Many questions I have to ask my father,and to write it down…because to save it from oblivion…Another story my grandmother was talking to me about chetniks ( serbian nationalistic troops, that cooperated with nazis in WWII) and today in Serbia they want  rehabilitation of them…She was very angry about this rehabilitations, because she knows who they were.

I hate when they use WWI for strengthen patriotism in every country, 100 years after. Memorization of WWI in my country was kind of political propaganda. There are things to remember, but it is a question what kind of lesson we learned from the past and why we remember wars? Governments uses them to underline obedience and glorify militarism, bravery, and celebrate “victories”and political consequences of particular wars. They trade with grief and  individual emotions. It is not the same to grieve for the solder that defends has no other choice and the one that is serving imperial colonial interests…like in Syria, there are innocent people who dies every day, and there are solders, bombs and plains that comes from military states. Usually those who defends militarism and say that WWI was not needless war they are defending colonial and capitalist interests and if you ask them what they think about other uses of weapons, like in revolutionary actions, they would say that they are against it.

Anarchism’s antiwar orientation and anarchist pacifism

Anarchist-pacificm is another issue, when anarchists are against war. What anarchist pacifism means? Anti-militarism for anarchist should be anti war orientation against wars that upper classes perform, refusing to participate in this conflicts, and doing anti-war propaganda trying to explain to wider audience why this wars are needless and what consequences may be. The history of WWI and the hypothesis of defending the land is hard to stand. The real cause was imperialism and desire to rule, expand the power. And yes this are economic reasons. It is the other thing how the war was explained to lower classes that they need to go in war to “defend their country”, patriotism, etc. Also the beginning of WWI was misinterpreted…In some versions they blame Gavrilo Princip’s assassination of France Ferdinand for it. There are a lot of anti-war activists, anarchist that were against the war. Explore this article: https://robertgraham.wordpress.com/2014/08/07/international-anarchist-manifesto-against-the-first-world-war/

But anarchist anti-war orientation doesn’t mean that anarchist are against the use of arms, in all cases. There are anarchists who reject using of arms, who are only for demonstrations,and waving flags at the protests, organizing at the work places, and among syndicates (like anarcho/syndicalists). And sometimes, this pacifist anarchists are accusing others that fight or avoiding to show their solidarity with such fighters that choose to use arms in their class fight because of fear or because they disagree with this methods of fight. Division between pacifism and militarism leaves here traces on those who literally understand the language and think if you are pacifist (against military in the hands of the state) that means that you can not show your solidarity to comrades that choose to fight with arms for the cause of revolution…(the same cause they claim to fight too.)

The fight for anarchism is the fight for peace. I agree with that claim. Only, I do not accept pacifist orientation of anarchism which denies all forms of armed actions to oppressed class. The war is not over,not that particular WWI is not over, but the world after that leaded to another war, and wars in 20 and 21 century. Wars are fought with different arms than in past, but not less butchery. We need to rethink what is “pacifism”. In modern days military operations across the world, leaded by NATO and USA,are apologies of “operations for peace”. This are old colonial tactics that serve and protect colonial interests of rich minority. And this “pacifist” actions are no different from WWI reviews that have apology for WWI to start…but yet putting the guilt on another…when they say that WWI started because of Sarajevo assassination. Also, they blame Serbian nationalists for that, although  it is another mistake because Gavrilo Princip who shot France Ferdinand was not serbian nationalist, he was serbian, but his views were anarchist, and he belong to the organization “Mlada Bosna” that was pro-Yugoslavian, and anti-monarchist. They organized themselves against oppressor (in this case Austria, monarchy). They read anarchist literature. Also there is a poem that Gavrilo Princip wrote in the prison. It is misinterpretation to call them nationalists. In Serbia assassination of the kings, happened also against Serbian king Aleksandar.

Class division between private grief and public honoring the victims

Australians have a big digital archive for WWI. I read the stories about Australians , how they much suffered in WWI.  100 years after WWI, there are and were more in 2014, ongoing discussions on memorials, grief, the roll of different countries in WWI, the role of women, how families commemorate deaths, about burial of deaths, etc. One part of this consequences of private grief and way to commemorate dead, is that mothers and families from private sphere draw attention of the public and necessity of collective remembrance of the war and victims of war. It was a way of unifying the dead of war and one part of trans-national, trans class, universal values, that every victim is the same (in death) as the people should be equal, in life also. Some differences, class status is sometimes represented in death also, in cemeteries, but main tendency was that all solders should be buried in the same way, with same insignia and honors… What is new in WWI, dimension and need of honoring the dead solders, glorifying their dead, giving a meaning to their deaths, that they did not die in vain. There is a space for political propaganda, in this connection between private and public emotions, in this case grief, and commemoration, memorization of deaths. Whenever we deal with some individual, private emotion, on public and universal level, there is a possibility of manipulation…the work of ideology.

Interpretations that try to cover class-divisions they try to say that war is classless, that rich and poor died in the war equally, proving that with decisions of governments about commemoration of death solders, that it was proclaimed that they all need to be  buried in the same way. But this was not applied to deserters. Desertion was cruelly punished (by death) … and these cases are rarely discussed under the veil of state secrets. All this we need to have in mind when Remembering Galipoli.   What the war memorials talk to us? There is an interesting anarchist article about War Memorial Encounter.

Mari Gilmore in the poem “War” writes about the loss and death, feeling of losing someone very close, beside the political and government’s stories of glory death that became a phrase with which was communicated with solder’s families after their son’s death in a war.

Anarchist also commemorate deaths of their fellow companions,usually assigning the their name to political actions: from direct actions that are dedicated to lost companion to assigning their name to Commando,  units for the fight and revenge.

Knowledge chooses its project,
each project is new and chooses its moments,
each moment is new, but simultaneously emerges from
the memory of all the moments that existed before

— The Interior of the Absolute

The sun still rises