A - I n f o s
a multi-lingual news service by, for, and about anarchists **

News in all languages
Last 40 posts (Homepage) Last two weeks' posts

The last 100 posts, according to language
Castellano_ Deutsch_ Nederlands_ English_ Français_ Italiano_ Polski_ Português_ Russkyi_ Suomi_ Svenska_ Trk�_ The.Supplement

The First Few Lines of The Last 10 posts in:
Castellano_ Deutsch_ Nederlands_ English_ Français_ Italiano_ Polski_ Português_ Russkyi_ Suomi_ Svenska_ Trk�
First few lines of all posts of last 24 hours || of past 30 days | of 2002 | of 2003 | of 2004 | of 2005 | of 2006 | of 2007 | of 2008

Syndication Of A-Infos - including RDF | How to Syndicate A-Infos
Subscribe to the a-infos newsgroups
{Info on A-Infos}

(en) Britain, Solidarity [anarchist] Federation, Direct Action - DA-SF-IWA #40 Autumn 2007 - Anarchism and celebrity don't mix

Date Mon, 03 Nov 2008 16:59:18 +0200

I'm sorry I'm not sure how to say this but what on earth is the article 'The
Cult of Celebrity and the Poverty of Everyday Life' doing in an
anarcho-syndicalist magazine? --- ''Rejecting the cult of celebrity, confronting
the banal rubbish which passes as entertainment and creating our own
alternatives to these is a necessary part of the process of transforming social
relationships.'' ---- I take serious issue with that quote. How exactly are we
supposed to be ''confronting the banal rubbish that passes as entertainment''?
While it is an improvement on that awful "War Games'' article in issue 38, I do
have to ask why it is acceptable that such a fragrantly lifestylist tone and
what comes across as an almost snobbish contempt for popular culture are
acceptable in a class struggle anarchist publication.

I'm sure it isn't intentionally
meant to sound snobbish but say-
ing things like ''- or, more likely
nowadays, on their eye knacker-
ing, toxin leaking, power guz-
zling, 'x boys boxes' thingy which
comes free with every ten ton of
McDougles fat-dog burgers
chemi-coke'' (DA issue 38) is just
an absurd comment to make. I
mean what's wrong with eating
burgers and playing computer
games, seriously like? I always
grab a burger if I'm travelling
back a bit drunk from a night out,
even if I try and watch the calo-
ries when I'm a bit more sober.
Likewise I find Heat and OK!
and that a bit boring for sure, but
have no idea why that particular
aesthetic decision of mine some-
how would make me an anarchist
because I ''rejected celebrities''.
Most of my workmates read
celebrity magazines or the like
mostly because it's boring at work
and coz the magazines are fun in
a tongue in cheek way. I don't feel
the need to patronisingly go off on
one to them about how they are
''buying into the spectacle'' or
some similar sub-situationist

Dear comrades,
In DA 39, the 'Environ-
mental' article reads in
"The future we fight for
has a system of produc-
tion and exchange
driven not by short-
sighted profit, but by col-
lective need and the full
participation of workers
and communities in
deciding what gets made
and how"
Surely this should read
"...a system of produc-
TION...", since a libertar-
ian communist society
will abolish
all forms of exchange in
order to distribute goods
and services on
the basis of need, and
to prevent the re-emer-
gence of economic
inequality and class
Which is to say that pro-
duction and distribution
will be organised
according to the princi-
ple of "From each accord-
ing to ability, to each
according to need".
I was also a bit confused
by reference in the arti-
cle to individual
ownership of resources,
for the same reasons.
I don't mean to be over-
ly critical but this needed
to be said, I felt.


If you have any comments about the
content, or anything else regarding
the magazine, please e-mail us at
A - I N F O S N E W S S E R V I C E
By, For, and About Anarchists
Send news reports to A-infos-en mailing list
Subscribe/Unsubscribe http://ainfos.ca/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/a-infos-en
Archive: http://ainfos.ca/en

A-Infos Information Center