Updates, updates. New banner up, courtesy of my good friend Andrew. Leave a comment and let us know what you think.
The Resources page has also been updated with some new reading–a piece called “Anarchy & Alcohol” (put out by CrimethInc.) which analyzes the role of alcohol in the life of an anarchist. It’s a good read, and raises some important points for those of us who want to dedicate our lives to the struggle. Check it out.
May 1st, 2008 at 11:28 am
Interesting read, although I have to say that, from what I’ve seen, the ‘anarchist’ (hell, anybody) who drinks 40s and whiskey every night is the kind of person who is an ‘anarchist’ only because their default reaction to anything purporting to have authority over them is “fuck you” and drinking the world away is one of a handful of ways to say “fuck you” to that most persistent authority, conscience / consciousness. To deride substance use by speaking only of its excess is ridiculous; alcohol, like any substance we put in our body, can be used as a tool — in this case a social one — and yet, like many, many other substances we ingest, can be poisonous to both mind and body if over-used. Whether or not it does something the body can do naturally is not the point: the point of alcohol is as a coordinating ’social lubricant,’ something to bond over and through, something to allow mutual relaxation when conscience and consciousness will not ease of their own accord. If you’re one manic motherfucker, maybe you can feel great all the time. That’s not the way most people are built.
The problem with the tired mantra of getting “high on life” (and not ‘drugs’) is that not everyone is able to do it; it doesn’t matter if the reasons are social, personal, or physiological, some people need a little help to relax. And let’s be honest, it would be wonderful if we could all be extremely happy with no ‘artificial’ input other than what we can hold in our mind, then we could all sit around doing nothing and enjoying it. We wouldn’t have to buy bicycles or jeans or computers or music, or find members of the opposite sex to, well, have sex with. Really, why draw any kind of distinction between alcohol and the other visceral joys in life? Nothing should be overdone, and to single out alcohol for prohibition is as useless as abstaining from anything else because it ‘can be destructive’. Sex can be awfully destructive, let’s all abstain forever! (that oughta take care of the problem . . .)
You don’t want to support ‘the man’ with alcohol purchases? Make your own goddamned beer, or hard cider — that’s even easier: all you need is a jug, apple juice, and some yeast. Don’t want to become addicted to liquor? Don’t drink so fucking much! Have some goddamned self control!
. . . and if you can’t do these things? That’s your problem. The rest of us can learn to drink in moderation, without using it as a crutch, and can do so without tacitly supporting ‘the system.’
There are problems with alcoholism in a lot of disaffected fringe movements in this country, but making abstinence the only option is as asinine as ‘Abstinence Only’ sex education.
May 1st, 2008 at 2:27 pm
I agree with you.
What I took from the pamphlet was that drinking is essentially a distraction, and a tool of oppression, and I agree with that as well.
So I agree that there is nothing wrong with moderation, but I would argue that our generation is particularly inept when it comes to figuring out how to “tow the line,” and so some of us need to abstain.
But aside from just the alcohol, I think a lot of this is about bar culture, which has always seemed to me to be an easy way out (or in, as the case may be). Then again I spent 3 hours last night at a bar with friends, so take that for what it is.
May 1st, 2008 at 5:43 pm
i like the banner.
particularly the phoenix.
i didn´t actually bother to read about that other stuff, though. i´ll do it later.
love yous!
May 1st, 2008 at 8:18 pm
Don’t want to become addicted to liquor? Don’t drink so fucking much! Have some goddamned self control!
. . . and if you can’t do these things? That’s your problem.
It is just not this easy. Alcoholism is a brain disease. It is not a lack of personal integrity, self control, personal values, moral beliefs, etc. Alcohol, tobacco, heroin, cocain, meth, gambeling, etc entrap many many good people and suck the life and spirit out of them. Addiction is not a sign of a weak or bad person. It is a sign of a person needing some help to overcome a traumatic problem. To callusly say “That’s your problem.” when we live in a culture which prompts addictive substances and gleefully makes millions of dollars off the suffering of them and their families is a sad lack of compassion and understanding.
May 2nd, 2008 at 1:12 am
Odd as it may sound, my comments were not directed toward individuals — for whom drinking alcohol may not be something that can be controlled — but toward the societal groups the article was addressing and which, eventually, individuals belong to. On the individual level, a person is indeed subject to the chemical storms that control their brains, but a social group — *especially* a politically- and intellectually-coherent social group like anarchists — should know, collectively, better than to tie substance abuse into their lifestyle. Addiction is not the sign of a weak person, but it is the sign of a weak ideology.
I can understand that my statements might seem unsympathetic, but I assure you, they were not intended for interpretation on the scale of the individual’s battle against their own neurochemistry, but rather on the scale of the social grouping and how people choose to fill their time. I know quite a few anarchists who are capable of drinking in moderation, and a few who even make beer; in my mind, there is clearly nothing inherent about being an anarchist that makes one an alcoholic. I would argue that these problem communes the article mentions where everyone is drunk all the time are groups whose ideology requires alcohol consumption in excessive levels, and it is these groups that need to reexamine their moral integrity, because they are enabling the trauma that alcoholism causes. In these cases, I applaud the article in attempting to spur these groups to kick the habit. Where I disagree, however, is that I don’t think that the act of consuming alcohol and being an anarchist are essentially at odds. Any community which has, collectively, an alcohol problem ought to look at what its morals are, because at that level, it is indeed a flaw of integrity, self control, and personal values, because they lure in alcoholics and drug-addicts. A social group should be somewhere an alcoholic can go for understanding and support, not the expectation of taking a pull at the bottle as it is passed around.
May 2nd, 2008 at 3:49 am
I think the article was quite clear about not judging drinkers, and about clarifying the importance of individual choice. Anyway,
are alcohol and anarchy at odds? Not necessarily. But being a responsible anarchist means working to break down oppressive hierarchies to create a more free society. This involves putting time and energy towards local projects, it involves critical thinking, and it involves understanding the sources of our suffering so that we can make adjustments. Now, does alcohol take away our time and energy, does it interfere with critical thinking, does it obfuscate the roots of our suffering? It can. It definitely can.
So are they necessarily at odds? No. But are they likely to be at odds? My answer is yes.
May 2nd, 2008 at 8:58 pm
Sexy banner. It really pulls the room together.
May 2nd, 2008 at 10:38 pm
Thanks for the reply Andrew. Well said. The difference between ” groups whose ideology requires alcohol consumption in excessive levels” and the individual is an important distinction. Such groups abound in society, not just anarchists.
Jack, I agree.