Note: I delivered a version of only the first part
of this ((1)-(3)).
(1) Writing exercise.
Quietly, without talking to each other: what might plausibly occur within the
next five years, which would significantly alter the context in which we do
activism (and criticism, writing,
etc.)? Write down an event, an
occasion, or a nexus of circumstances. The tricky part: try to think of
something no one else here will.
Okay? We done? Forget that for now. Next, try to think
of something which could form the initial basis of a small working group. It could be anything at all: a plan of action, an
issue, method, skill, topic, theme, problem, goal, relation with another
organisation. Write that down too. Put loads if you like.
(2) Interlude.
While waiting for some people to finish, the rest of
you might think about this: are progressive and radical aims categorically
opposed?
Or must we consider their frictions and tensions on a
case-by-case basis?
I believe the latter! An example of something which is
both a stepping stone towards "soft," humanised, social democratic
capitalism, AND towards radical stateless forms of social organisation, is
country-by-country reporting of corporate tax.
BUT I also think those of us who agree on this - that
progressive and radical aims are not always everywhere mutually exclusive -
will be unable to persuade very many people that it is true. So I also think we
need to anticipate that the assumption that they are will permeate the
communities in which we conduct our activism.
[To discuss later: Other concrete examples?
Affirmative action, all women shortlists, quotas etc., considered not as
supremely enlightened nudging, but as a tool actually capable of that cliché,
smashing the existing social order?]
(3) Outcome of writing exercise.
Take a look at the first thing you wrote: your
plausible prediction. Could it also
be an example of something which a working group might address?
It may seem counterintuitive to prepare for what may
never happen, when disaster is all around us right now. But there are many forms of preparation. Preparing for what may be can be a way of processing
and responding to what actually is. Preparation could be choosing topics to
become experts in, for instance, so that we know who to go to help us learn, as
certain topics becomes more sharply relevant. Preparation could be gaining
varied and diverse skills in many different areas, which might be shared with
the group as they begin to look more useful. Preparation could be starting work
now on extremely likely events: the next General Election. The people and
institutions many here might designate "the enemy" -- corporations,
states, right wing activists -- are constantly forecasting, analysing, and
preparing.
[To discuss: of course, people and institutions
many here might consider allies also do a lot of planning -- perhaps green
activism in particular. Climate Camp didn't just happen. Perhaps some people
here are already involved in long term planning? Anyone want to share experiences?
Or perhaps that's better left for working groups].
[To discuss: what is "the present
moment"? How long is it? What is the role of "urgency" in how we
do or don't co-ordinate ourselves?]
Here are a few of my suggestions: there are riots again this summer. There is a flu
pandemic. There is a terrorist incident: Islamist, leftist, right wing,
ambiguous. Utilities catastrophes. One of us is invited to a party at 10
Downing Street, how do they best comport themselves? A major economy defaults
on its sovereign debt. The UK is locked under heavy snows - no one saw that
coming. A violent change of government in a European country. A further wave of
NHS privatisation is announced. A major new deployment of British troops. A
major tax haven is afflicted by an ecological catastrophe. The pound rapidly
depreciates. Here's a nexus of circumstances: it's 2017, Scotland is leaving
the union, and the rump union under a Lib-Lab coalition is holding a referendum
on EU membership.
[To discuss: but how does this relate to fear? How
does it relate to refusing official versions of the future?]
[To discuss: dilettantism. Perhaps not so much a "risk,"
just an inevitable part of the bell curve?]
[To discuss: that desire, "enough talking, we
want action!" Cf. Harry / Walter Benjamin on the judge's violence. Cf.
this: "you take the guy on the left. Okay, on three." Obviously we
don't want action without thinking
and talking. We want praxis, you could say.] [I think if we're honest with
ourselves, we know the kind of talking that's really characteristic of praxis.
It is dense with promises, for instance.]
[To discuss: I meant to look this up earlier, but
ran out of time -- possibly I can look it up in Keston? -- Marx has a
reputation for being deliberately vague about post-revolutionary society.
First: do those who know his work think that is the case? Second: if so, what
is the rationale? Third: is it applicable today? Should we be describing in
concrete, minute detail the kinds of futures we desire? In five years, in ten
years, in fifty? And learning about this detail, arguing about it?] [Example of my attempt to write a
constitution for the UK. An absurd labour, but what if there were even just
twenty lawgivers, who all knew what the others were up to?]
[To discuss: did people mostly put down suggestions
that are downbeat, gloomy, catastrophic, calamitous? Of course, whether they
are finally ultimately undesirable partly depends on what we can come up with
to respond to them!]
[To discuss: the system of domination is incredibly
strong and fluid. We talk about co-ordination, building solidarity, raising
consciousness, transforming culture, ideology, language, and those are
certainly the most important projects. But as a typical poet and student of the
humanities, I have a pocketful of reasons why the prognosis for those projects
isn't great. Ideology is impervious to ideology critique. Recuperation makes
all tools temporary. But I suspect that sometimes the machinery which sustains
our social order has to operate near its top capacity. The social order whines
and shakes. Pieces rattle and might even fly into a new configuration.]
[To probably not discuss: If I understood Marxist
economics better I might be able to say this so that it sounds less stupid, but
it seems to me that market relationships should be counted as part of the means
of production. Markets are located in the world, in institutions, customs and
habits.]
[To probably
not discuss: Sometimes I get a massive crush on the police. When they really
are protecting me from someone, for instance. Can I take precautions against my
own disposition to compromise and skive at times of unpredictable social upheaval? Can we talk about
this without always employing the terminology of steadfastness, weakness,
foxholes?]
(4) Practical / administrative suggestion /
non-suggestions.
Many of us are already doing activism. Whatever comes out of today, I think it will be most
useful if it is not only compatible
with existing activism, but also nourishes it. I think it should feed, rather than drain, our personal capacity.
It should be autotelic, you might say. Or more simply,
it should be fun. Adorno famously
suggested that fun was a medicinal bath, which is great, because medicinal
baths are really fun!
So what fits that criterion? What energises, nourishes?
First of all, we should do this again some time,
y'all! Perhaps a little more
frequently than once a year?
In terms of rubric I think we could keep poetry to
a minimum. We are poets - I'll use
that as shorthand for poets, ex-poets, scholars, critics, fans, friends of poets - our discussion &
activism will inevitably be permeated by poetry. What would happen if we just
focus on politics, activism and revolution? Don't "ban" poetry from
the agenda or anything, just don't make it the main reason we've all got
together.
(Of course, funding applications & any prominent
public presence, would need to be
full of tact and tactics).
[Note: For instance, have a book table and
readings, and leave it at that].
Secondly, we should keep in touch in-between.
[To discuss: Golden Hex. UKPoetry, etc. Sharing tales
of derring-do as well as of laziness and frustration could be fun. A place
where you can have a hilarious big grumble about your non-poet comrades and
activist friends? It would be amazing if the convention was that we can all
share words about the political work we are doing - however small - or are not
doing, and it never be interpreted as dismayed or proud or passive-aggressive!
But if we end up bickering, it could still be worth having - it's just a matter
of setting up the right filters and folders in your email, so it's a
conversation you can check in on, rather than one that confronts and
disheartens you].
Thirdly, I wonder if working groups for these more speculative projects, these luxurious counterfactuals,
could be fun? They could be both online and face-to-face. But I think there
ought to be a sense of accountability melded with our revels.
[To discuss: Adding suggestions to those put down
in the writing exercise. Circulating this list. What if we pick problems in the
next few days and form groups around them? Then we could definitely be
demonstrating six months' worth of work when we all get together again?]
[To
discuss: Not just fun, also therapeutic. Stabilising. A relief, a support, a
solace. Also: where you go when you know you need to be set right?]
[To probably not discuss: maybe shouldn't call them
working groups?]
[To probably not discuss: another interesting
feature of the slightly longer time-frame is the way it could hybridise certain
features of horizontal and hierarchical organisational structures. That is, a
group whose number was called by history -- the "UK exits the EU"
group when the UK exits the EU -- has a certain temporary authority, evoked naturally
by sensitivity to initial conditions, path dependence and lock-in. There would
be no presumption that the group should give them any special deference, or
anything like that: they wouldn't necessarily be the last word on the matter,
but they would probably speak the first words].
(5) But what should we be doing AS
poets?
Is my answer to that, more-or-less,
"nothing"? Is poetry just a distraction, a will-o'-the-wisp legging it
into bogland?
PRETTY much, yeah. Try just for a moment
to ignore the disanalogies, & hear something true in this analogy. What
should we, as pastry chefs, do? How
can pastry cheffery respond to the constantly shifting, often intellectually,
emotionally & materially
overwhelming nexus of global capital, the state system, patriarchy & other forms of
domination?
We might laugh at the pastry chefs! But the pastry
chefs might respond: we have a community (or at least, a sort of weird distributed neighbourhood). Moreover, we
have a network of chefs who are tutors and administrators at chef schools, who
can sometimes access funds to buy bus and train tickets, and book rooms we
can meet, in which there is coffee we
can drink. We share a complex, intellectually intricate passion which gives us a
way of talking & bonding with & energising each other, even if we only know each other a little. In our
tasting sessions, where we display our latest inventions, we have inexpensive and ever-ready
solace & entertainment, & to
hold such sessions in the midst of political activism may change the
collective mood in some vital way. We
are all over the world. Some of us love each other. Some of us are colleagues.
Some of us have children together.
(6) Poets and their powers!
I wouldn't for one second equate pastry cheffery with
poetry or with pushpin. But I think it is interesting that the sociological form of poetry, if I can put it that way, even emptied of everything that makes poetry poetry, is already a pretty
alarmingly good platform for political activism.
To finish, I hope to make amends for this crude
pedagogy by suggesting some specific things which poets can accomplish as activists
better than anyone else. These are frail ideas: I'd love to talk about them,
but I'm more likely to renounce them than defend them. I wonder if you can see anything
in them which you might strengthen?
Remember I'm talking about a mix of poets and other
writers and artists, plus critics, scholars, fans, friends, ex-poets, etc. (And
obviously I don't mean all poets).
(a) Negative capability. Romantic irony. Dwelling
in contradictions. Containing multitudes. I've mentioned the version of this which feels blazingly important to
me right now: getting together as poets, and yet focusing on things other than
poetry, poems and poets. Pastry chefs couldn't cope, but I think we can.
[Note: Poetry-phagic/memento mori fashion in naming
of poetry events currently giving way to an interest in welfare state,
institutions, organisations? From Verse Hearse and Against to Dole, Syndicate,
Benefits. (Throat Cuts Not Benefit Cuts has a bit of both)].
[Note: These are dark times in which,
paradoxically, citizenship is possible only on the margins, only underground. I
hope we can know that what is
specific to us must seldom take priority
in what we strive for. We are voices on radios, retweets, bodies in the
street.]
[Note: Perhaps ask Jen to repeat point about
Graeber?]
[Note:
Perhaps relates to humanities / liberal arts education together with
amorphousness of post-neoist poetry . . . I feel confident to speak against
poetry because I know that poetry will flow around whatever is created to keep
it back].
[Note: But do we sometimes congratulate ourselves
for assimilation, rich variety, etc. when actually e.g. Marxism, anarchism
& various identity politics well-represented, but not perhaps e.g.
associationalism, development and aid discourse? Multiple specialist knowledges
on which reproduction of social order partly relies. Radical theory is perhaps
theoretical not by virtue of form - speech, words, words, words - but because
it is empty of those knowledges.]
[Note: Cf. generally Middle English charge of
hypocrisy: "for someone who hates capitalism, you're pretty keen to sell
your art!" or "if you love the planet so much, why are you printing
all these flyers? Why did you fly to China?]
[Keywords: contradictions, essentially contested
concepts, overconceptualisation, blether]
Closely related:
(b) Poets are good at getting bored and wanting to
skive. Poets are also good at knowing about damaged life + the absence of the
transcendental signified. Nobody's
perfect eh? Nor do we ever express ourselves perfectly. Might as well give each
other the benefit of the doubt. No point in laying the blame for impersonal
endlessly self-replenishing violence at the feet of its latest unlucky conduit.
Could poets be particularly tolerant of terminological diversity, rather than
insisting on the use of shibboleths?
Hold up a second. Co-ordination and unity remain the
priority. Unity within the left, unity between leftist projects &
those rooted in identity politics,
unity with less politicised elements of working classes, global unity, unity
even with the third sector and the private sector's own baffled, despondent
moralists within sustainability and corporate social responsibility. BUT THAT
SAID, I think there is a significant side-project which is NOT to do with
unity, but to do with skiving the work of achieving unity. How can we work towards the common good without common
ground? How can we harmonise our activity without necessarily really
understanding one another, let alone agreeing?
For instance, I am interested in steering around
any plans which require a consensus that does not yet exist, however gentle & rational that consensus seems.
[Note: e.g. I'm interested in occasional
imaginative and perceptive choices of language which let sleeping essentially
contested concepts lie. Sometimes if I express myself in a careful and/or
unusual way, I don't have to have that long flurried debate which mainly only
blurs the world and leaves the real material loggerheads from which it spouts
intact and undepleted. I don't think we should stop talking about violence, but
I often find it helpful to talk about vandalism, or blood shed, or wage labour,
or "talking loudly over people" instead. Disagreements can dissolve
with that kind of specificity. Or they can be deferred, but the deferral may be
all that is needful].
[To maybe discuss: sped through those unities with
embarrassment. Why? Cf. e.g. “unity between feminism & women.”] [Keywords: Critique
of humanism. Sense of systematicity].
[To discuss: Forgiveness, tolerance, tenderness,
acceptance, negative capability, openness, "beholder's share"].
[To discuss: Poets & intersectionalism.
Mainstream / "vulgar" intersectionalism whereby unique meanings are
impossible, all meaning being reducible to a set of coordinates in warring
categories of class, gender, statuse, wealth, race, ability, sexuality, beauty,
etc. At the same time, vociferous critique of unchecked privilege can be transformative
in a way sarky comments & rolled eyes fail to be. Also: important to DO
intersectional critique, rather than endorse intersectionalism as a superior
brand of feminism, class politics, race politics, et al.). Also: role of
passions? Not just quasi-indifferent interest in disciplining others, but the
outburst? A space in which candidly taking offense can truly be collectively
liberating? Is this just impossible?]
[To discuss: Acts & statements have ideal
implications which are not necessarily materially realised.
"Reconciliation in the performative abstract of real antagonisms," a
definition of idealism which has stayed with me. But also: "the
performative antagonism of differences which, left to chance, might do no more than briefly brush into each other.
More concretely: when do we call out privilege? Perhaps if there is a
community, however inchoate, it should be not incidents, but patterns of
behaviour. Must be done generously: risk of confronting someone with a
"dossier" of all their abuses of privilege.]
[To discuss: I don't know if we really have any
special talent at avoiding talking at cross-purposes. You'd think we might be,
being so sensitised to the ineradicable fruitful ambiguity of language, and to
the non-identity of concept and thing, and all that.] [But then, I feel like I
personally have had more than my fair share of imaginative forgiveness in these
communities, almost as if it's gone about that the throat I so often bare may
be toxic?].
[To discuss: I am often tempted to hurl accusations of idealism at poets.
I'm tempted to go, '"We need poetry which is..." is categorically
wrong, as "we need
pastries which are..." is categorically wrong. That cannot be what is
needful.' But often I need to check myself. I think maybe these moments involve
a particular disadvantage that pertains to poets but not to pastry chefs. The
stuff we write, for reasons which are partly mysterious to me, can only be
grasped with a terminology which is political through-and-through. But it is
also intricately equivocal. A good working assumption is that a seemingly
intelligent individual making an apparently exaggerated claim for the efficacy
of poetry does so in the context of a life of pragmatic political reasoning and
practical political work, and indeed that their poetics are only intelligible
within such a context. Indeed this alleged idealist may well steeped in such
practical political work, if they feel that the distinction between it and
poetry is something that can go without saying, though the two share so many
textures and structures. Of
course this isn't always true, but it often is, and it's a good assumption. I
wonder if anyone can think of any specific examples of poets arguing about the
political efficacy of poetry, even though they completely agree? I can if I
have to.]
[To discuss: categorically wrong in the same sense
that "we need to eliminate the idea that..." is categorically wrong?
That is, idealism / Marxian ideology?]
[To discuss: ask Keston to repeat the thing about
"applicability" being a bit of a funny concept?]
Relatedly:
(d) I am
interested in ratcheting activism.
Gains which may be small, but are very difficult to undo.
[To discuss: Relationship between entrenchment
& cultural production per se.
Justin's example of ruining someone's reputation as peculiarly difficult to
undo.]
Relatedly:
(e) I am
fascinated by a kind of Hippocratic nonmalifence as applicable to activism. "First, do no
harm." How, under conditions of
such social complexity? How can we do actions which may accomplish little or
nothing, but are guaranteed not to interfere with thousands of other
simultaneous worthwhile projects. Is this perhaps just impossible?
And as we've already talked about
(f) Prepare for the future. Imagine the future. The ones we want, and the ones that might be. We'll
figure out how to connect them eventually.
[To discuss: normalising detailed exploration of
speculative social orders. We're going to have conferences, aren't we? Let's
have conferences about how journalistic ethics, or payroll and HR, or
librarianship, or rigger erector certification, or digital archiving, or
refrigeration industry, or workplace dispute resolution, will change under
radically egalitarian circumstances such as all things held in common. My sense
is that such speculative constructs are more tenable grounds for critique than,
say, dogmatic anthropology ("human nature/human condition is such-and-
such"), or the most conspicuously unfulfilled official values of our
society (e.g. liberty, democracy, prosperity -- cf. Jen on confronting capital
with its hypocrisies)].
[Note: Compare Sean / Brecht didacticism vs.
suggestions.]
(g) Many of us are good writers.
[To discuss: We needn't only write
poetry & criticism about poetry. News, opinion, political analysis, broader
cultural analyses & critique, debunking, public / class interest research,
even forums and message-boards.]
[Cf. Selena's question about audience. There are
platforms, if we are prepared to inscribe the Palimpsests of Permanent
Depression. There's the internet, especially online wings of print journalism.
Wikipedia. 3,000,000 hits for Maggie in April. Nearly 60,000 for UKIP, 200,000
for David Cameron. 150,000 for Muslim, 380,000 for Islam, 170,000 for feminism,
40,000 for intersectionality, spoon 12,000. The radio. World Have Your Say, Any
Answers, etc. etc. I text in to Radio 1Xtra often signing myself with your
names BTW. Difference b/w crankish venting & agitprop is determination,
coordination. There's also family, friends, students, colleagues . . .]
[To
discuss: Can we write more simply? Can we express ourselves more plainly? We
can have a sophisticated understanding of simplicity, by all means! We are
academics but we are not only academic writers: can we popularise radical
political philosophy? We know there is no such thing as the general reader, but
that shouldn't be an excuse! That should be our starting point!]
[To discuss: Perhaps these are genres that have no
more transformative power than
poetry. But perhaps that's something we'll never know. If any of us have a
hunch that they do have such potentials, shouldn't we pursue them now? If we do
it together, it might be fun.]
[To discuss: mere "transferrable skills"?
Why do we sometimes think we are "co-opting the enemy's language & concepts,"
sometimes think that they are
rather infecting & subverting us? Cf. SMART: Specific, Measurable,
Attainable, Relevant & Time-bound activism.]
(h)
Relatedly, we can articulate new political positions that are difficult to
pigeonhole.
[To discuss: dishonest? Not for me for complicated reasons.
The twin provisionality of a view I recognise both as leftist and as my own, (a) that it waits on the
realisation of certain material conditions, (b) that I may say I no longer
believe it, or that I was pulling your leg. For me, (a) takes priority. AND
YET].
[To discuss: compare difference between traditional
social realism & Keston's use of term].
(i) Relatedly
- and I'm afraid I'm being
impossibly crude again - we can attack the good guys. This could include us. This could include critique, satire, translation,
narration, recontextualisation, a kind of strange detournement. I don't feel we should necessarily feel
like we're playing catch-up, & forever trying to be more like movements for
whom political struggle is their sole raison d'etre. We
speak from a slightly different place.
[To discuss: Steve's question to Danny?]
[To discuss: the danger of producing rhetorical
grist for right wing / liberal quietist mills].
[To discuss: the danger of participating in
hyperfragmentation of radical politics].
(j) Recruitment? Come for the weird, weird, weird poetry, stay for the
social justice!
APPENDIX
The only document we wrote. I may have lost a few
bits, sorry. & I think there were a few bits that
were just notes & doodles. If I've left
anything vital out maybe someone will say. Some of these could be suggested
topics for the next big meeting of this kind. And/or a small group might pick
one as a project to work on. And/or it could be a
list we keep adding to.
1 Impact of global warming on
natural resources, animal populations, human communities
2 Middle class coming nearer the
poverty line.
3 Propaganda aimed at many
different sorts of people, not just "natural" allies
4 Links with trade unions
5 Subjectivity - how to engage
people not included, not like us ...
6 Practical activism. What laws
/ attacks on groups are happening? How can we prevent them? Investigate
SPECIFIC THINGS. Think about the consequences of this.
7 A European general strike.
8 Militant wildcat strike in
British factory
9 24 hour general strike
10 Police strike
11 Organisation of rent strikes
12 Help for the evicted
13 Affiliation & the state of
revolutionary organisation.
14 Korea / China conflict.
15 North Korea launches a full scale
military attack on S. Korea
16 Violent change of government in
European country
17 A coup (not in Britain)
18 Major new deployment of British
troops
19
Further rise of UKIP
etc.
20 Rise in right wing terrorism
21 Leftist terrorist incident
22 Islamist terrorist incident
23 Small group assignments
24 Sea levels rise, massive removal of
people to interior lands
25 Group formation around super-local
site specific slogan placement
26 Culture jamming
27 Neighbourhood panel
28 Bus shelter, [street & road Job
Centre sanction busting]
29 High profile death of protester /
activist
30 Future event: interruption to the
flow of elections
31 Action: [word jams in shopping
centres] (crossed out), writing [slogans] (crossed out) poems on people's
bottoms
32 Criminalisation of squatting in
commercial buildings
33 How might critical writing be done
in prisons?
34 Left Unity sweeps the polls
35 Establish what poetry does well; DO
IT BETTER ([is preparatory to poetry])
36 Major European economy defaults on
sovereign debt
37 Pound rapidly depreciates
38 Collapse of Chinese banking system
39 Esperanto
40 Volapük
41 “Esperanto”: how can we create
languages, platforms, institutions which bring together disconnected struggles,
improve mutual comprehensibility?
42 EU referendum in 2016
43 Define the means of production in
the places we live
44 Ecological catastrophe in London,
emergency services and hospitals can't cope
45 Multilingual / multinational poetics
events galvanising pro-Europe feeling
46 Situationist adornment of government
posters with actual truth, e.g. speech bubbles
47 Print & distribute fake Sterling
with internationalist messages hidden
48 Flyer in front of specific
businesses
49 Tobacco made illegal
50 Collective shoplifting
51 Collectively shoplift and stockpile
tobacco
52 Promote mixed arts encounters
53 Thinking while moving - walks
54 Thinking in costumes
55 Happenings with people we've never
met
56 Tactics at protests, combating
police, e.g. kettling
57 Squat a building, create Occupied
Centre for Militant Poetics
58 Aliens
59 Communications
60 Parliament surrounded and cut off by
a ring of 100,000 people demanding a Constituent Assembly
61 Slogan production
62 Analysis of language of Prime
Minister's Question Time, circulation of notes
63 Dissolution of public universities
64 Address to financial system
65 Address transnational European
dimension
66 Corporation tax, tax havens, capital
flight, country by country reporting, unitary taxation, different kinds of
state
67 Increased repression - raids on
Leftist papers etc.
68 Workhouses
69 Massive food shortages because of
bees
70 Blockage of bourgeois media, i.e.
prevention of distribution via hacking and physically
71 The Singularity
72 UK withdraws from Human Rights Act
73 UK exits the EU
74 Kidnap IDS
75 Expanded privatisation of NHS
76 Questions of publication, specific
Qs in location of group
77 Margaret Thatcher dies again
78 Someone in the poetry community will
be on live TV: what should they speak about?
79 Analyse patterns of public
"debate" on e.g. immigration, find ways to derail / disrupt
80 Conference to include workshops by
non-poet activists
81 Workshop on representations of
capitalism
82 Ambiguity of language
83 Children and literature
84 Action against poverty amongst
children
85 Amazon succeeds in swallowing us all
86 Utilities catastrophe
87 Huge rise in price of water globally
88 Plague (or flu pandemic)
89 Bird flu ... No seriously
90 Build a ram
91 Fly bombing for poetry readings
92 Next General Election: what can we
do?
93 Referendum on Europe
94 Exit EU
95 A UKIP Tory supply and confidence
arrangement
96 Military dictatorship in Greece
97 The collapse of the Eurozone
98 Tory / UKIP coalition
99 Hung parliament in 2015
100 Coalition collapses or amicably
disentangles into a supply and confidence arrangement this summer
101 Slogan creation and imaginative
dissemination
102 Intervention and infiltration into
organisations and events
103 Public [calumny?] of the enemy
104 Define the enemy
105 Form cadre within existing issue specific
activist group
106 Biological crisis
107 Mass progressive movement
108 Slogan MAKING and - key - SPREADING, ie
putting in right ground
109 Finding or developing spaces in which
people who don't write poetry, or make art, then do. Would this help create a
sense of "self development" and self-organisedness or is this just
wishful thinking?
110 To agitate against the resulting increase
of cuts and erosions of workers' pay and conditions
111 Final privatisation of language /
knowledge
112 Police nano bots
113 UK drones (ie in UK airspace)
114 Total surveillance via nanotechnology
115 Languages as a common [scribble]
116 Building a Twitter account with 100,000
followers to tweet, test slogans and push out content
117 Develop a new revolutionary aesthetics for
above
118 Social media & agitprop
119 Subtly rewrite all of Wikipedia
120 Criminalisation of social networking
121 The language uses of Palestinian refugees
122 Kate Middleton gives birth to centaur
123 The newly developed super wheat advances
wheat intolerance, previous forms cannot now grow. A food shortage becomes
immediate in the West
124 Bacteria will create a lot of tsunamis
over the world
125 Bio poetic rehearsals to transform
126 Long history of rape, sexual assault and
sexual abuse in the royal
family is exposed
127 WWIII
128 Civil war England / Scotland
129 Quakes from fracking
130 Sean Bonney gets shot by a rubber bullet
while reading at a police line, he dies and his death is taught on school
syllabuses
131 Start writing elegies about Sean, talk
about how awful it is that Sean is dead
132 Disappearance of Jow Lindsay
133 Jow Lindsay policeman?
134 Something bad happening to Lenin's corpse
135 A reviewing circle: every book is
circulated and reviewed by everyone
136 Reading Hegel properly
137 Read more books
138 Permeate poems through new outlets
139 Disappearance of vowels
140 Scotland turns
141 Bad survivalism
142 Regular coordinated calls to radio slots
e.g. Any Answers, change terms of debate
143 Riots occur this summer
144 Critique all aspects of culture and
society not just poetry
145 Links with leftist musicians even if their
music is terrible
I've mixed the order a bit to draw out a few
patterns, & hopefully to suggest a kind of swollen & bulbous version of
the present moment. My original idea with this exercise was that small groups
might be formed by people signing up to work on a particular topic. But I
suspect that'd only really work as online groups, & there seemed to be much
more support for forming groups on a geographical basis, (& maybe on the
basis of mixed ideologies, aesthetics, perspectives,
& people not necessarily just going with their
closest friends ... & with one eye on inclusiveness while also being, I
dunno, a bit realistic about it for now anyway).
Here's another contribution that slipped to the bottom of my bag!
ReplyDelete146 Dissolution of unions.
147 Organising small scale protests to accompany larger ones.
Practice & develop processes for effective consensus.
Make something, grow something, give time.
Support the poets, work collaboratively, foster political enthusiasm and crystalise political thinking
148 Revaluate all previously upheld values
ReplyDelete149 De-mobilize upward mobility
150 Read THIS:
http://www.marxists.org/history/australia/1909/poetry-militant.htm