The "Sexual-Political Organization (SexPol)" was an organization by Wilhelm Reich that tried to combine sexual liberation and generally topics of sexuality with political activism. This was long before Reich got "mad" and tried to shoot "orgone rays" with metal pipes up into the sky to dissolve thunderclouds - and to wane off UFOs that were threatening peace on earth - in his mind.
With SexPol, he was not alone. Sexual liberation was for a long time part of the radical left and Anarchism. Even in the 19th century they already championed "free love" and other issues. With the 1960s movements, sexual liberation often became the major focus of leftist and countercultural movements.
But I think we totally lost in this regard. Sexual liberation no longer seems possible. There are two reasons for this. Capitalism, especially by using its media (including its porn industry), has seized total control of human sexuality, and controls it in each and every regard. The new, "modern" sexual archetype is the 'rich and powerful (young or old) politically conservative or fascist man'. No longer the rebel, or the anarchist, or the hippie with unwashed hair. But there was also a threat from inside. Did the hippies or the Anarchists really bring sexual liberation to the people? Was there not a divide between noble talk and the real actions (talking about sex and having sex are obviously not the same)? And worse than that. There was for example a pedophile problem in both the American and European post-60s left, that the left decided to close its eyes to. Even Wilhelm Reich himself once stated he dissolved "SexPol" because of sexual misconduct that happened in these organizations.
I feel this in the end totally discredited the sexual liberation movements in the eye of the public.
So, we lost this battle - likely for quite some time. In the political struggle, it might be wiser to focus on other things (that might be more important) than sexuality in the moment. Will this ever be different? Maybe. But maybe not.
On The Social
I said I was influenced by Hakim Bey. He always championed the social. He wrote it was no accident that there was an attack on the social with the likes of Thatcher - "There is no such thing as society" - at the same time as the rise of computers and electronic networks in the 80s - both leading way to a painful "individualism".
He wrote that if you managed to meet every week with a group of people that are "not your family or 'the people you know at work'", you already have attained the revolution - because you have fought the prime anti-social force of organized power that splits communities and the world in small peaces. Workplace and family were excluded as they were already "self-alienated" groups that were no harm to power, instead complicit with it.
Nowadays a lot more groups could be added to this category. And we have reached a situation were indeed many, many people spent their lives almost entirely at the workplace and their family - is the victory of "power" total?
So what I tried to do with my activities in the Hardcore scene was to give room to the social. That's why I was involved in the AuditivSex fanzine, the Hamburg Hardcore Radio, the All-Out Demolition! parties and so on - to give room for people to meet each other. For freaks to meet other freaks. To create a free community.
Now, I quickly realized this was no easy task. Because the people I met in Hardcore, especially end of the 90s and early 2000s, weren't exactly "social butterflies". They were loner types, often socially anxious or just liked to keep to themselves.
But, maybe paradoxically, at the same time, they were not uninterested in the social. So with the radio, or with parties, I indeed met weekly with people that were not "the people I know at work or my family". And, was it the revolution?
Yes, it was. I never felt so magical in my life. There was a true community of freaks that exchanged ideas and debates and just partying, and of course most of all, great music. There was a free exchange of emotions and thoughts that was not based on a community that stifled, but instead embraced each others individualism.
I don't say this to "boast", but to show that it was really possible.
Nowadays, I feel the rise of social media "paradoxically" is an even more severe attack on the social, and it gave rise to a very toxic all-encompassing false "individualism". False individualism is now marketed as a kind of "salvation" - people longing to be lonely. But in my opinion this is because of the toxic "herd mentality" - a false social - that is existing in society and the media now, that really makes it seem better to be "alone".
Is it still possible to fight this? What way should one choose? With the radio station, for example, real people met at a real location in space and time and a real contact was there. Could the same achieved by creating a Facebook group, for example? Likely not.
With my own activity in the Hardcore scene, I feel I'm part of a community again - again a very magic community. But it was years of struggling, is almost invisible, more fragile than how it was in 2000.
But, there must be a way. Even if we have to find new methods. The fight will continue.
He wrote that if you managed to meet every week with a group of people that are "not your family or 'the people you know at work'", you already have attained the revolution - because you have fought the prime anti-social force of organized power that splits communities and the world in small peaces. Workplace and family were excluded as they were already "self-alienated" groups that were no harm to power, instead complicit with it.
Nowadays a lot more groups could be added to this category. And we have reached a situation were indeed many, many people spent their lives almost entirely at the workplace and their family - is the victory of "power" total?
So what I tried to do with my activities in the Hardcore scene was to give room to the social. That's why I was involved in the AuditivSex fanzine, the Hamburg Hardcore Radio, the All-Out Demolition! parties and so on - to give room for people to meet each other. For freaks to meet other freaks. To create a free community.
Now, I quickly realized this was no easy task. Because the people I met in Hardcore, especially end of the 90s and early 2000s, weren't exactly "social butterflies". They were loner types, often socially anxious or just liked to keep to themselves.
But, maybe paradoxically, at the same time, they were not uninterested in the social. So with the radio, or with parties, I indeed met weekly with people that were not "the people I know at work or my family". And, was it the revolution?
Yes, it was. I never felt so magical in my life. There was a true community of freaks that exchanged ideas and debates and just partying, and of course most of all, great music. There was a free exchange of emotions and thoughts that was not based on a community that stifled, but instead embraced each others individualism.
I don't say this to "boast", but to show that it was really possible.
Nowadays, I feel the rise of social media "paradoxically" is an even more severe attack on the social, and it gave rise to a very toxic all-encompassing false "individualism". False individualism is now marketed as a kind of "salvation" - people longing to be lonely. But in my opinion this is because of the toxic "herd mentality" - a false social - that is existing in society and the media now, that really makes it seem better to be "alone".
Is it still possible to fight this? What way should one choose? With the radio station, for example, real people met at a real location in space and time and a real contact was there. Could the same achieved by creating a Facebook group, for example? Likely not.
With my own activity in the Hardcore scene, I feel I'm part of a community again - again a very magic community. But it was years of struggling, is almost invisible, more fragile than how it was in 2000.
But, there must be a way. Even if we have to find new methods. The fight will continue.
On My Music - Part 2
I've sometimes been asked why I don't make (much) music in the style of my early period of music (1996-2004) anymore, like my LP on Widerstand or my digital release on Praxis for example. The reason for this is the following. My first period was fueled by vile opposition to the western world of music - from pop music to "classical" western music. I hated its ruled and codes and commands and limitations and tried to get as far away from it as possible. That's why I made Breakcore with weird sounds and otherwordly rhythms (or was it the other way round?). But in the end I realized I was fighting a losing battle. I used odd time signatures, but my tracks still had beats and drums and percussion. I used atonal scales but my tracks still had notes and "melody". So I still was close to western music, and still followed the ruled and commands and codes even if I didn't want to. The only way out for me was to banish music as a whole. My Breakcore and Industrial sounds were - still music, and for me, music has to be rejected - total. But what to do now? In a train of thought that I wrote down elsewhere, I made the choice to express ideas that can not expressed in music by using music. Techno, Doomcore and Speedcore were just the right template for this. The focus is not on the drum or the percussion, not even the melody, but the idea that is expressed by them. And the same idea could be expressed by Doomcore, or Folk Guitars, or Rapping, or Baroque Music - so the music itself, the genre, the sounds, faded into the background and only the idea keeps going on. It's like a cook who one day becomes a poet but doesn't publish them in a book, instead puts them (edible?) into the cakes at his restaurant. The music and all it's rules and mistakes and fallacies is negated to become only a tool for the communication of ideas. Now, I must admit, my hatred for music is not total. I do adore Doomcore and Techno and so on. But the important part is the idea.
The West And Islam
Regarding Islam, the west makes the same error it always does when regarding culture different to its own. There are two views; either different cultures are seen as generally good or generally bad. There is a lack of differentiation. I'm sure that most cultures, both in history as well as those that exist right now, are better - much better - than western society. But that does not mean that there are not some very bad things in *some* cultures - the oppression of women, prosecution of homosexuals and transgender persons, and so on, that can not be tolerated.
Likewise, the "World Of Islam" is seen as one monolith block - you're either for or against it, tolerate it or - not tolerate it. Of course this is far from the truth. There is not one Islamic culture. In Islamic nations there are atheists, Christians, anarchists, feminists, liberals, nihilists... In fact I'd say there is a much more serious force of anarchism within the territories of Islam composed of people who are real activists and ready to go to prison - or into worse fates - for their anarchist belief, while in the western world the anarchist movement more often or not is a "play house" for middle class boys and girls, safe, perfumed and secure.
Rather than condemning the Islamic world and culture as a whole, it'd be much more sensible to encourage these anarchist and nihilist radical forces within that realm. Of course the western mainstream will never do this; they'd rather side with the oppressors than these unruly rebels; just like the later allied forces rather let Franco and his falangists win the Spanish civil war instead of helping the anarchists in that era. Because authority likes authority and "democratic" authority rather sides with fascists or in our case with fanatical Islamic maniacs than side with people who fight for a free and just society.
But we, outside of this power spectrum, should show our sympathy and respect for these forces inside the territory of Islam fighting the good fight.
Likewise, the "World Of Islam" is seen as one monolith block - you're either for or against it, tolerate it or - not tolerate it. Of course this is far from the truth. There is not one Islamic culture. In Islamic nations there are atheists, Christians, anarchists, feminists, liberals, nihilists... In fact I'd say there is a much more serious force of anarchism within the territories of Islam composed of people who are real activists and ready to go to prison - or into worse fates - for their anarchist belief, while in the western world the anarchist movement more often or not is a "play house" for middle class boys and girls, safe, perfumed and secure.
Rather than condemning the Islamic world and culture as a whole, it'd be much more sensible to encourage these anarchist and nihilist radical forces within that realm. Of course the western mainstream will never do this; they'd rather side with the oppressors than these unruly rebels; just like the later allied forces rather let Franco and his falangists win the Spanish civil war instead of helping the anarchists in that era. Because authority likes authority and "democratic" authority rather sides with fascists or in our case with fanatical Islamic maniacs than side with people who fight for a free and just society.
But we, outside of this power spectrum, should show our sympathy and respect for these forces inside the territory of Islam fighting the good fight.
Music And Success
Others who came after me had much more "success" in music. Maybe I never had the chance at that, or lack of talent. But the truth is I took a lot of effort to not make this happen.
When I started doing music, the "Underground" attitude was in full effect. Making music for a larger audience? Heresy! Already playing at a party with more than 50 people in the crowd smelled of "treason" to the underground spirit. So when I later played my first gigs at Tresor, my former friends answered with ridicule. Playing at a Techno club! A big club! How could you dare!
The second reason was my mental health problems. If the little "success" I enjoyed in 2002-2003 already wrecked my mind, what would happen if this went to a larger scale?
But the most important reason was something different. I intent to have a specific effect with my music. To simplify it, let's call it a "psychedelic" effect. Music to feed your head, to break established concepts and notions you have in your mind, to wreck your notion of reality and go into ecstasy and beyond. Now, the things is that these techniques are not without risk. The effect might not be predictable. What if it has a negative effect on people, a "bad trip" or worse?
My excuse for spreading my music regardless was always that the people who find my music are likely experienced with these things; they're psychonauts or used to subversive and deviant music so they can handle this amount of "psychedelia". It's not likely that some EDM-dolly or Pop-head with no experience in these realms will suddenly be hit with this type of music.
So I thought it is much more safe if I limit the audience of my music to this, let's call it, "inner circle" of psychedelic Hardcore, and only rarely release it on bigger labels or get it to a larger audience.
For example in 2011 one of the biggest labels in "Industrial Hardcore" asked me for a release; and only in 2014 I felt it was safe to have some tracks released on that label, because my music had changed from negative content to more positive vibes.
There also seemed to be a kind of automatism to this effect; when I indeed did this "neg vibe" music, my audience was very limited indeed; and in 2014 when I tried for the most positive aspects, I reached way more people than before.
Still I had my phases of regret when I thought that, because of what I mentioned above, I should have not spread my music at all.
I'm not alone with this motion; Throbbing Gristle mentioned that when this type of music or art or concept enters the "social realm", things can get out of hand very quickly; that's why they aimed for doing music and collaborations etc. rather on an individual, than social level.
Still even with doing, or aiming at, purely "positive" music I feel this "Psycore" is not without danger; so it's important to use a lot of care with it. But I think, if one stays true to ones aim, maybe doing all this, doing this kind of music, is still the "right thing".
When I started doing music, the "Underground" attitude was in full effect. Making music for a larger audience? Heresy! Already playing at a party with more than 50 people in the crowd smelled of "treason" to the underground spirit. So when I later played my first gigs at Tresor, my former friends answered with ridicule. Playing at a Techno club! A big club! How could you dare!
The second reason was my mental health problems. If the little "success" I enjoyed in 2002-2003 already wrecked my mind, what would happen if this went to a larger scale?
But the most important reason was something different. I intent to have a specific effect with my music. To simplify it, let's call it a "psychedelic" effect. Music to feed your head, to break established concepts and notions you have in your mind, to wreck your notion of reality and go into ecstasy and beyond. Now, the things is that these techniques are not without risk. The effect might not be predictable. What if it has a negative effect on people, a "bad trip" or worse?
My excuse for spreading my music regardless was always that the people who find my music are likely experienced with these things; they're psychonauts or used to subversive and deviant music so they can handle this amount of "psychedelia". It's not likely that some EDM-dolly or Pop-head with no experience in these realms will suddenly be hit with this type of music.
So I thought it is much more safe if I limit the audience of my music to this, let's call it, "inner circle" of psychedelic Hardcore, and only rarely release it on bigger labels or get it to a larger audience.
For example in 2011 one of the biggest labels in "Industrial Hardcore" asked me for a release; and only in 2014 I felt it was safe to have some tracks released on that label, because my music had changed from negative content to more positive vibes.
There also seemed to be a kind of automatism to this effect; when I indeed did this "neg vibe" music, my audience was very limited indeed; and in 2014 when I tried for the most positive aspects, I reached way more people than before.
Still I had my phases of regret when I thought that, because of what I mentioned above, I should have not spread my music at all.
I'm not alone with this motion; Throbbing Gristle mentioned that when this type of music or art or concept enters the "social realm", things can get out of hand very quickly; that's why they aimed for doing music and collaborations etc. rather on an individual, than social level.
Still even with doing, or aiming at, purely "positive" music I feel this "Psycore" is not without danger; so it's important to use a lot of care with it. But I think, if one stays true to ones aim, maybe doing all this, doing this kind of music, is still the "right thing".
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)