(red & black with a green stripe thru the middle, more of a rainbow really...)
Bullets? (and me a Pacifist?!)
Bureaucratic Sabotage ~ a true story
Hijack the world! ~ It's ours anyway
Ireland ~ for the Irish
Newsreal (with sound)
Obama - New Emperor's Clothes
Policeman (live performance video)
Queen ~ Up the Republic!
Street Fighting Man? (2005)
Torture Couture (the latest U.S. fashions)
War .......MORE coming soon........
(DK takes aim...)
get an eyeful of that rifle
feel the trigger - don't ask why pull
taking life is just a triffle
those who live by the
'HOPE - the hope of an improvement
was always the mainspring of revolutions'
The revolution in general is no longer imagined according to socialist patterns of realism, that is, as men and women stoically marching behind a red, waving flag towards a luminous future: rather it has become a sort of carnival.
CHOMSKY, who says it so much better than I can (after all, the man's a linguist!):
I was attracted to anarchism as a young teenager, as soon as I began to think about the world beyond a pretty narrow range, and haven't seen much reason to revise those early attitudes since. I think it only makes sense to seek out and identify structures of authority, hierarchy, and domination in every aspect of life, and to challenge them; unless a justification for them can be given, they are illegitimate, and should be dismantled, to increase the scope of human freedom. That includes political power, ownership and management, relations among men and women, parents and children, our control over the fate of future generations (the basic moral imperative behind the environmental movement, in my view), and much else. Naturally this means a challenge to the huge institutions of coercion and control: the state, the unaccountable private tyrannies that control most of the domestic and international economy, and so on. But not only these. That is what I have always understood to be the essence of anarchism: the conviction that the burden of proof has to be placed on authority, and that it should be dismantled if that burden cannot be met. Sometimes the burden can be met. If I'm taking a walk with my grandchildren and they dart out into a busy street, I will use not only authority but also physical coercion to stop them. The act should be challenged, but I think it can readily meet the challenge. And there are other cases; life is a complex affair, we understand very little about humans and society, and grand pronouncements are generally more a source of harm than of benefit. But the perspective is a valid one, I think, and can lead us quite a long way.