I talked about how somewhen after 2000 the Breakcore and Experimental Hardcore scene jettisoned its formerly Anarchist, radical and left-wing politics and eagerly embraced an oldfashioned breed of purist Capitalist politics, best exemplified by artists that yearned for "underground fame" - or even money - instead of starting a social revolution.
It's easy to blame outside forces for this. Maybe it's even more easier to blame ourselves. But the truth is more complex. Which is that the breed of politics we embraced was toxic and poisonous itself; basically, the Capitalist politics that replaced it were evil too, but slightly less evil; so in some twisted circumstances it was to the better that this happened, in some way - maybe.
What was so toxic about our politics? The Anarchism and Communism that fueled the scene was not some old fashioned Anarchism in Style of Kropotkin, or Bakunin, or Proudhon. It was a strain of new anarchism and left-wing ideologies that came into place somewhen in and after the 60s, and was later put forward and intensified by authors like Hakim Bey, John Zerzan, Bob Black. The "Temporary Autonomous Zone" concept by Hakim Bey for example was a major influence on the free party scene, and labels and artists.
What was problematic about this form of anarchism? It had a very anti-intellectual, anti-rational core. This 'movement' was very critical of culture, of civilization, of intellectualism, of ideals, of logic, of rational thinking, symbols, even language and mathematics itself (one of the zines of this movement was actually called "Killing King Abacus" to show its anti-mathematic sentiments). I'll give you one Hakim Bey quote to exemplify this: "The Church’s idea of a list of damnable books probably didn’t go far enough—for in a sense, all books are damned.". Books, language, words, talk, speech; all highly suspicious to them.
I give you another example, the critic of ideals; a traditional Anarchist criticism of the state would be; the state says it protects the common good; but it doesn't; therefore the state is dangerous and should be overcome. Now, these new Anarchists said, the state is only a secondary problem, the problem is the dichotomy of good and evil itself; the state or the church or the philosophers put forth an ideal of "goodness" that no one can reach, and suggests punishment to those that can't reach it; therefore creating perpetual judgment, both by outside institutions and 'the cop inside your head' to all humans, as they can't attain this detached ideal of "goodness". Thus, the idea of good and evil itself should be criticized and possibly dropped.
To get back to Hardcore; of course not everyone embraced this anti-intellectualism, not even those who directly tried to put Hakim Bey's etc. ideas into reality; but this dangerous strain of anti-intellectualism was there and grew more dangerous. The capitalist ideology that replaced it was not very idealistic or intellectual either, but it had at least some last reference to idealism inside; even if just the empty and sickening ideal of "enjoying" money and fame. But this is not a solution either.
Both should be rejected; the anti-intellectual anarchism and the empty, old fashioned capitalism.
So what is to be done? To create anarchism and communism that is intellectual and rational; that embraces logic and thinking and language and culture and ideals... books, art, philosophy, maybe even science...
And to put this into our art, and activities, and communication...
It's the only way to escape this deadlock of nihilistic anti-idealism vs. diseased consumerism.
And this was we can create something truly good; and we can change society; and we can fight for reason and rationality.
No comments:
Post a Comment