Folk music and the sexual mores of the Right

[sabotabby]

Two completely unrelated topics, by the way.

zingerella and I went to see Eric Bogle last night. For those of you who are asking, "Who's that?" -- you probably have heard his songs. He wrote two of my favourite anti-war songs, "The Band Played Waltzing Matilda" and "The Green Fields of France." Apparently a lot of folks (including some who write for newspapers) think that he's dead. Anyway, he's not, and fantastic show.

After the show, we got to talking about a 400+ comment flamewar on Making Light (check it out!), which is vastly amusing and includes a few well-deserved disemvowellings. If you don't have time to read such hilarity, it involves the murder of the Nielsen Haydens' downstairs neighbour and mentions, in passing, the blog entries of a group of conservative girls who were slumming at the strip club where said neighbour worked. The girls, and their friends, none of whom have heard of Making Light and who are under the impression that TNH was trolling for more traffic by linking to their oh-so-popular blogs, descended en masse to decry the hypocrisy of liberals, etc., resulting in a fine moment of Inigo Montoya-esque "I do not think that word means what you think it means."

Of particular note is this comment by Anarch about a brand of right-wing bourgeoisie with whom I have had very little real-life contact. By coincidence (okay, because I go searching for these things), I stumbled upon christianitysex. The majority of posters seem to believe in strict abstinence for everyone but themselves -- or rather, they claim to believe in abstinence for themselves, but then go into massive guilty contortions when they find themselves unable to actually live up to their own standards. The degree to which they openly struggle with their own repression is quite illuminating. These are primarily the old-school fundie types -- and I do see where they're coming from, even though I think it's sad and pathetic. What I find more befuddling, though, are the "Sth Prk Rpblcns" that show up in the Making Light thread and occasionally on conservatism. Is this really common -- people who want to control other people's sexuality (by aligning themselves with the Religious Right, by opposing reproductive freedom, etc.) but simultaneously flaunt their own? Or celebrate their own individualistic liberty (smoking pot, hanging out in strip clubs) while setting up structures that reduce the liberty of others?

Also, is it true that Young Republicans throw really good parties? Because I've heard from a firsthand witness that the Progressive Conservatives don't.

Discuss!

P.S. Dear CBC: I don't like the ELF any more than you do, but could you please restrict the term "violence" to describing acts of force against living creatures? Property destruction is not violence. It's property destruction. Kthxbye.

Comments

[sabotabby]

I didn't say that.

[teapolitik.livejournal.com]

But how much more (or less) carbon dioxide is released by burning them than by not burning them?

[sabotabby]

Why don't people just take baseball bats to them? It's ridiculously easy to break a car if you know how they work, since they pretty much break on their own anyway. Especially SUVs.

Or...I don't know, do something a bit less individualized and symbolic and that won't result in the owner just buying another brand new vehicle.

[bikesexual.livejournal.com]

But busting their windows is a cheaper problem for them to solve.

The only way to hurt the rich is financially.

[sabotabby]

Nor did I advise busting the windows. ;)

[teapolitik.livejournal.com]

Why don't people just take baseball bats to them?

I can't know for sure the motives behind the particular tactic, but my first guess is that folks banging the shit out of big vehicles on an open lot is probably a lot more likely to result in arrests or worse, than if folks set a fire and get moving.

It's ridiculously easy to break a car if you know how they work,

Yes. But it is noisy and you can only do one at a time.

Or...I don't know, do something a bit less individualized and symbolic and that won't result in the owner just buying another brand new vehicle.

Well, as far as I know they generally target sales lots, rather than individually owned vehicles (meaning a major loss to the company rather than a small loss to one consumer). But the vast majority of activism is symbolic, nearly all of it. The symbolism can have value, depending on what you do to follow through.

As far as individualization... if that's a fair critique, we can pretty much count out the possibility of any kind of direct action of that magnitude. How do you expect people to organize actions like this and survive infiltration and counterintelligence, without acting in decentralized affinity groups?

What would you propose as an alternative strategy for ELF, that would not be individualized or symbolic, and would be, at the very least, as effective?

[sabotabby]

See my comment to bikesexual, with the caveat that I wouldn't join ELF so I'm hardly in a position to advise them on tactics. I suspect that my goals differ significantly from theirs, or at least from the goals articulated by some members.

I'm not opposed to people doing destructive or illegal activities (as I'm sure you know!), but I need to be convinced that these actions are strategically intelligent and that the people doing them have an understanding of why they're doing it. ELF is hard to criticize in that respect because of their structure -- an ELF action can be (and this is the context of what they were talking about on CBC this morning) a kid setting fire to a car in a parking lot and writing "ELF" nearby. I don't think that kind of thing has convinced a single person to start taking public transit.

I don't see how direct action can't take place outside of the context of the affinity group -- not to denigrate affinity groups -- wildcat strikes being the most obvious example. In terms of environmental activism, large scale blockades have worked. Direct action by affinity groups works too, given a common understanding and community support, which doesn't exist in ELF's case.

Do you think that ELF's strategies have been effective? It seems to me as though the State is exaggerating their significance and impact.

[bikesexual.livejournal.com]

So what do you suggest we do?
Asking, or even protesting, isn't going to do anything to stop.

[sabotabby]

I wouldn't advise any sort of illegal direct action on teh intarwebs, especially in an unlocked post. (ELF, if they do exist, can use their imaginations.)

The problem with a lot of these actions -- legal or otherwise -- is that they're still largely symbolic. When Julia Butterfly hung out in a tree, she didn't stop clearcutting. The forest was clearcut, but her particular tree and a few others were saved. That's not very useful. Contrast that sort of action with, say, Chico Mendes' campaigns in the Amazon, which was all about making workers realize that they had a stake in protecting the environment and in using resources sustainably. It's a harder, longer, and less dramatic fight, but it's ultimately more significant and effective.

Focusing on one yuppie's SUV might be cathartic, but even if it's destroyed, it doesn't change the car-centred outlook of North Americans or the poor urban design of North American cities that forces those outside of the downtown core to drive.

Anyway, as I said earlier, I very much admire the efforts of Judi Bari and of groups that have addressed issues of environmental sustainability rather than establishing a human vs. nature dichotomy, which often becomes an even more pernicious worker vs. environment dynamic. Look at how many environmentalist groups have been infiltrated by the far-right, for example, or that have adopted anti-immigrant stances. I wouldn't advise ELF on what they should do because I wouldn't join ELF in the first place, but they could start by asking themselves what it is that they actually hope to accomplish.