Thanks Andre, I enjoy Chris Hedges. _"Democracy, a system ideally designed to challenge the status quo, has been corrupted and tamed to slavishly serve the status quo. We have undergone, as John Ralston Saul writes, a coup d’état in slow motion. And the coup is over. They won. We lost. The abject failure of activists to push corporate, industrialized states toward serious environmental reform, to thwart imperial adventurism or to build a humane policy toward the masses of the world’s poor stems from an inability to recognize the new realities of power. The paradigm of power has irrevocably altered and so must the paradigm of resistance alter."_
"A French writer, sympathetic to anarchism, wrote in the 1890s that "anarchism has a broad back, like paper it endures anything"---including, he noted those whose acts are such that "a mortal enemy of anarchism could not have done better. ... The anarchist historian Rudolph Rocker, who presents a systematic conception of the development of anarchist thought towards anarchosyndicalism, along lines that bear comparison to Guérins work, puts the matter well when he writes that anarchism is not
a fixed, self-enclosed social system but rather a definite trend in the historic development of mankind, which, in contrast with the intellectual guardianship of all clerical and governmental institutions, strives for the free unhindered unfolding of all the individual and social forces in life." Noam Chomsky "Notes on Anarchism"
Presenting the Anarchist tradition, which has a history stretching back hundreds if not thousands of years, as everyone doing what ever they want when ever they want is at best dishonest. Anarchism is more a challenge to the self-serving authority of elite groups than it is any kind of dogmatic belief.
Roughly, from the Greek: An - without; Arches - Rulers/Kings
It seems strange that Anarchism is being derided when western 'capitalist' social democracies have so much blood on their hands. Anarchists cannot be blamed for the invasion/carnage in Iraq or the unsustainable neo-liberal mercantilist corporate experiment which, according to the latest U.N. environment report, is actually threatening the existence of humanity.
Would it also contain pockets of, say, armed robbers or simple thieves?
That's another one of the things I love about contemporary society, there are no more thieves, armed robbers or murderers anymore and the political elite work harmoniously with their corporate counterparts for the benefit of humanity *vomits*.
Which is why the TSA amendment bill passed yesterday, 108 for 12 against.
The Labour/National coalition strikes again.
(also checking to see if my gravatar is working)
We all know the "ruling elite" here, and their dirty little secrets, all too well.
The ruling elite don't necessarily have to be New Zealand elites to affect New Zealand policy. Pressure can be easily applied to a small country/economy like New Zealand by the larger sharks (U.S., Britain and Australia). Unless New Zealand plays the anti-terror game to the satisfaction of the likes of the coalition of the wiling we could find things like travel to those countries more restrictive, access to those markets meeting greater obstacles, work visas and academic exchanges diminishing.
I imagine New Zealand's 'anti-terror' activities have a way to go before they come close to parity with the likes of the U.S., Britain or Australia..., if you want to be in the gang you need to learn to behave like the other gang members.
""As nightfall does not come at once, neither does oppression. In both instances, there is a twilight when everything remains seemingly unchanged. And it is in such twilight that we all must be most aware of change in the air -- however slight -- lest we become unwitting victims of the darkness." : William O Douglas
Here's an alternative theory, this whole 'anti-terror' raid is little more than an attempt by the security services to see what they can get away with and an opportunity to put into practice in the real world what they have been practicing in secret for the last 1/2 dozen or so years.
The ongoing effects of global warming, the rapid depletion of unrenewable resources and the growing disparity between those who have and those who are subject to their decisions will eventually lead to a desperate underclass and a disenfranchised majority. 'Democracy' as presented by the mainstream media will become impossible to sell to an increasingly incredulous public and the only option left to the ruling elite and their business class functionaries will be to declare a state of national emergency, always framed of course as being in the name national security and in the interests of the public good.
I wouldn't advocate assassinating a head of state or public official of any sort, aside from being completely pointless - as I point out another one just pops up in the last ones place - it also feeds the paranoia machine and increases the excuses for furthering "draconian laws". I think you will find that your civil rights are directly proportional to the amount of wealth at your control - the richer you are the easier it is to pursue your rights regardless of the fate of your 'democratically' elected leader. Do you actually believe if we voted for a leader who seriously challenged the authority of the Anglosphere's rulers plans for this country it would be allowed? Perhaps you have already forgotten the Palestinian experiment with democracy. "If voting could change the system, it would be illegal." -Theodore Adorno
Interesting point though bringing up the terrorist attack on Benazir Bhutto and the CIA in consecutive sentences. I like this phrase__"...CIA used to be pretty good at it."__ ,so the C.I.A. having discovered the error of their ways and now-a-days cruise the planet spreading love and freedom,...surely this is the fantasy.
As you are probably aware the C.I.A. have a long history of colluding with the I.S.I (Inter-services Intelligence) and through that agency channeled Saudi money to radical islamic fundamentalists in Afghanistan during the Soviet occupation. General Pervez Musharraf warned Bhutto of an impending attack and pretty much on cue it occurred almost immediately as Bhutto began her political campaigning fueling further anti-terror activities by the security forces there.
As for real terrorists the New Zealand government was pretty quick to prevent the Israeli terrorist Moshe Ya’alon from being arrested. This guy was a real mass-murderer not some S.I.S./police fantasy terror suspect.
"The vested interests - if we explain the situation by their influence - can only get the public to act as they wish by manipulating public opinion, by playing either uponthe public's indifference, confusions, prejudices, pugnacities or fears. And the only way in which the power of the interests can be undermined and their maneuvers defeated is by bringing home to the public the danger of its indifference, the absurdity of its prejudices, or the hollowness of its fears; by showing that it is indifferent to danger where real danger exists; frightened by dangers which are nonexistent." Sir Norman Angell 1872 - 1967
It is hard to take seriously the proposition that because Clark, Key or Bush might be assassinated by some nut the rest of society must face greater 'official' scrutiny and intrusion into their private lives. These people, the Clarks, Keys and Bushs , of the world are little more than talking heads reading from carefully prepared scripts (hopelessly in Bushes case). Nobody forced them into public office and if one of them is abducted by aliens, assassinated or spontaneously combusts, there is a little army of like minded individuals crawling over one an other to replace them.
The real danger is the publics propensity to take these people so seriously that they allow their civil liberties to be eroded so those who exercise control can continually extend their authority. Tama Iti and his sympathisers are less of a danger to society than the global crack-down on political dissent and activism operating under the guise of a 'war on terror'.
When people are silenced, alienated or face abuse at the hands of state sponsored terror they cease considering the peaceful option. The lesson the police and security intelligence agencies are teaching their targets is in future be more careful.
If the police/intelligence agencies were as sophisticated or intouch as they would have the public believe there would be no drug dealers, illegal weapons or criminal networks in Aotearoa/New Zealand. They are not and the Tama Iti's and activist networks are easy targets. This whole thing is propaganda, nothing else.
This whole NZ 'anti-terror' campaign is as inept in its execution as the U.S. sponsored 'war on terror' is globally. In both instances real terrorists are not the target and the collective punishment being meted out to the communities, which have the misfortune to inspire the mad fantasies of the security forces persecuting them , will react domestically as they have reacted internationally. As with the U.S.'s 'war on terror' this latest operation conducted by N.Z.'s security apparatus is fueling anti-establishment sentiment rather than suppressing it.
Realistically those described as the extreme fringe are the greatest beneficiaries of this massive waste of tax-payers money as they have just been handed the moral high-ground by the security forces. I can say, without any doubt, the police paramiltaries have not turned up any substantial terrorist weapons: explosives, grenade launchers etc, because if they had it would be all over the news.