Comment: The Unbearable Lightness Of 'Being' Just A Fan ...

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: Hahaha Jon (see in situ)

The Unbearable Lightness Of 'Being' Just A Fan ...

... of Liberty and its proponents.

Politician's lie because in our current situation, collectively, we are consumers of kitch.

"Kitsch is the absolute denial of shit, in both the literal and the figurative senses of the word; kitsch excludes everything from its purview which is essentially unacceptable in human existence...
Kitsch causes two tears to flow in quick succession. The first tear says: How nice to see children running on the grass! The second tear says: How nice to be moved, together with all mankind, by children running on the grass! It is the second tear that makes kitsch kitsch. The brotherhood of man on earth will be possible only on a basis of kitsch...
And no one knows this better than politicians. Whenever a camera is in the offing, they immediately run to the nearest child, lift it into the air, kiss it on the cheek. Kitsch is the aesthetic ideal of all politicians and all political parties and movements...
In the realm of totalitarian kitsch, all answers are given in advance and preclude any questions. It follows, then that the true opponent of totalitarian kitsch is the person who asks questions...
From that time on, she [Sabina] began to insert mystifications into her biography, and by the time she got to America she even managed to hide the fact that she was Czech. It was all merely a desperate attempt to escape the kitsch that people wanted to make of her life."

--- "The Unbearable Lightness Of Being" by Milan Kundera

[ Witness-- The revolution you propose heralded almost in the same breath as the post-revolutionary capitalist ( corporatist ?) soon-to-be-prevailing model is announced:
http://www.radicalcareering.com/hogblog/?p=79
http://www.socialmediatoday.com/SMC/166881

Kitch Curtain:
http://vimeo.com/groups/politicalvideoart/videos/6576118

***

]

Octobox, I went 'head and reread your statement ... and thought about some of it's intellectual antecedents, and your refinements in ideas ...
Essentially, I thought: ' where generally is revolutionary thought coming from, and where may it lead.'

As the title of my comment alludes, among other things, I am a great fan of a particular book and movie that has as it's backdrop some of the turmoils and revolts of the Spring of 1968. Well, those rebellious events, as historical revolution, 'tragically' came up short.

"The revolutionary hopes of the 1960s, which culminated in 1968, are now blocked or abandoned. One day they will break out again, transformed, and be lived again with a different result. . . . When that happens, the Situationist programme (or anti-programme) will probably be recognized as one of the most lucid and pure political formulations of that earlier, historic decade, reflecting, in an extreme way, its desperate force and its privileged weakness. What then was its privileged weakness? . . . They ignored the everyday fact of tragedy, both on a world and personal scale. They refused to face the need to find meaning in tragedy."
—John Berger in New Society (6 March 1975)

I endorse your rejection of collectivism in all it's forms; but, for discussion purposes only, and in order to facilitate the exchange of ideas, permit me some terms and labels which might describe certain of your views. You can find roots to some of your ideas in the anarcho-situationists,( I realize their's was a Marxist context, those were the terms of political discussion ... that was then, and this is now; and here you've cobbled your own brand of consumer-based objectivism.). Significantly, you are positive; the situationists were negative in their approach to foam-menting rebellion.

"This revolt must be attributed to an awakening of awareness about the real nature of “consumer society” — an awakening (and its articulation) that has its source in the intellectual (and practical) activities of a small group of insolent but lucid insurgents: the Situationist International. By a paradox to which history holds the secret, the SI remained practically unknown in this country for over ten years, a phenomenon that verifies Hegel’s reflection: 'Every important revolution that leaps into view must be preceded in the spirit of an era by a secret revolution that is not visible to everyone, least of all to contemporaries, a revolution that is as difficult to express in words as it is to comprehend.' "
—Le Nouveau Planète #22 (May 1971).

[ Further history:
http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/obituary/debord.html
http://flag.blackened.net/liberty/situationist.html ]

Fans embrace slogans, a reality which polititians and corporatists exploit. [ See Orwell, 'Politics and the English Language' ]. The situationists understood this; and each of these collectivists operate with a thinly veiled hypocrisy which abuses people while proving their point insulting the intelligence of individuals as they both mock and create a state of political cretinisation in which various forms of authoritarian control may dominate.

"But of course, it should have been obvious from the start that the Situationists do not have the slightest genuine concern with freedom. Their mask is far too transparent to conceal that familiar, vicious and authoritarian face beneath, the same old desire to dominate, rule and coerce other people. . . . It is indeed fortunate for the human race, however, that there now exist truly radical individualist and libertarian movements which are actually dedicated to leading it out of the Twentieth Century — into the Twenty First, into a new world of greater freedom and prosperity and not, as would the Situationists, back into the Dark Ages of slavery and poverty."
—Chris R. Tame, The Politics of Whim (Radical Libertarian Alliance, 1975)

Octobox, you seem to have immunizied yourself against the kitch of the founder's republicanism, and claim to reject authoritarianism and collectivism while you apologize for the esprit de corps of your colleagues -- de policia. Well, I tend to take you at face value any way because of your exhuberant emphasis on Individualism which you demonstrate on this forum by your own bold advocacy of often unpopular opinion. In short, I personally like your personal r'Evolting spirit. It is that individual r'Evolution which must be the foundation upon which to incite the next revolution to greatest effect, in my opinion.

r'Evolution must be about BEING ...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ofaor-0t3L4&feature=related

... an Individual; ...

... intrinsicly it is not a matter of troop movement ...
... nor about rabble...
bearing, nor baring, raised arms...

... in the street ...

......... or market,

wherever people gather and group.