For most of America’s history, one of the most righteous anti-white supremacist tactics available was looting.


Untitled strip by Charles Burns from Taboo vol. 4, published by SpiderBaby Grafix and Publications, 1990.

(via getradified)

Squidge In The Fridge By Caustic Window

Spent my afternoon assembling a playlist of everything I’ve been listening to on my drives to quarries and lakes. Finish off summer with it.

Fat Pat / Creedence / Metallica / Primetime / Juanita Y Los Feos / Devo / The Courtneys / Dead Boys / Catherine Wheel / David Bowie / Radioactivity / Lust For Youth / Thin Lizzy / Swervedriver / Total Control.

This is some weird military studies-influenced thoughts I had on the events in Ferguson tonight that I didn’t know where to put, so here you go.

Even though its what I studied, I always doubted that counter-insurgency style policing would catch on in domestic American usage. Seeing the arc of events in Ferguson has destroyed that however. What is happening in Ferguson is a doctrine of military and police action born in places of remote warfare, and is used to make ways of life threatening to the dominating force submit and exist in ways that only the dominating permits. To see strategy typically applied in places such as Afghanistan, Iraq, Rio De Janeiro, domestically is terrifying. It suggests that the existence of a frustrated black class in America is no longer just a problem to be excluded and policed, but forced to submit through continual militaristic action and political manipulation. 

The political manipulation is not to be neglected to understand what is occurring in Ferguson. Appearances by the Missouri Highway Patrolmen marching alongside protesters and promises of peace after days of violence by the “bad apples” of the Ferguson Police Department are not aberrations in this counter-insurgency strategy, but even more essential than the tear gas and armored vehicles. David Galula, the primary theorist of the strategy said, “In revolutionary warfare, strength must be assessed by the extent of support from the population as measured in terms of political organization at the grass roots. The counterinsurgent reaches a position of strength when his power is embedded in a political organization issuing from, and firmly supported by, the population.” The police and government offered peace, but only by total submission of resistance. Because those in Ferguson did not universally accept the rules of martial law imposed by the police and government, tonight’s brutalities were necessary to give weight to the political offers of the dominating force. Do not think that they have broken their promises of peace, all they were was a political solution to their problem: a movement of resistance that demanded legitimate justice for the murder of Mike Brown. Because this movement did not submit entirely to this political proposition, we see the violence return. I should hope that those in Ferguson continue their struggle, because all that submission to the police offers is empty promises of reform down the road. Right now, they have the momentum and support to continue the fight to bring justice to Mike Brown’s killers, and until the government makes genuine motions towards this, their offers of peace should mean nothing.

Anyone who wants to pursue a more thorough understanding of this strategy and perhaps use it theoretically in understanding events in Ferguson, here are some links to some basic reading. (David Galula’s essential text)

You’ll Never Walk Alone



If walking is the most philosophical way of getting around, solitary strolls in nature won’t cut it. You have to choose who to march alongside. 

Ways of getting around come with their own outlooks on the world. Cars, Americans are told again and again, mean freedom and comfort. Yet they can just as well be a burden, from the social costs of car-dependent communities to the way cars turn drivers into isolated individuals raging at the world outside their little metal box. Public transit can feel frustrating, involving lots of waiting and plodding routes. But there’s a solidarity that emerges on the subway or bus, the feeling that we’re all in it together, that makes it feel democratic. Whereas walking, trusting your own two feet, can mark one out as an interloper. It’s the mode of the solitary thinker, the flâneur, the backpacker. Yet it can be just as much a communal activity – from the solidarity of through-hikers on the Appalachian Trail to the crowd at a demonstration, people are on their own two feet together. The ambivalence of walking, which makes room for solo saunters and mass marches alike, has made it attractive to quite a few artists and thinkers.

For Frédéric Gros, a Parisian professor and Foucault specialist, walking is also the most philosophical way of getting around. In A Philosophy of Walking (originally published as Marcher: une philosophie in 2009), Gros expounds a view of the world in which walking is the cure for all modernity’s indignities. Setting off on a walk is self-liberation, discarding drab duties or even rejecting a “rotten, polluted, alienating, shabby civilization” for an ascetic freedom. Given his interest in Foucault, one might expect Gros to see the aimless, rambling walk as an evasive countermeasure against surveillance and discipline. But his emphasis is more on the philosophical, timeless value of wandering. He brings home the extent to which walking, practically the simplest activity there is, has been made almost peculiar in most societies. Yet his fundamentally Romantic sensibility leads him to an odd vision of the practice—so caught up in the sublime and lofty that it misses what’s at its own feet.

Read More

“I ask of film what most North Americans ask of psychedelic drugs.”
— Alejandro Jodorowsky (via the-king-of-refn-flowers)

(via criminal-delirium)

Proof I am not entirely worthless.