Some Of Those That Work Forces
Burning Books, Amnesty Int., Spotify, More Depressed NFT's and Ponzi Schemes
Morning Comrades!
I hope you all enjoyed Monday’s email, seemingly so and thank you all for your emails and messages, that was a pleasant surprise. There are several heavy topics I want to touch on over the next couple of days but first a few lines about drops etc. My printers all had covid of late and printing was delayed a little but we are back on track. I’ll be in touch with you individually about your orders later. Secondly, you can bet that I am making the above into something this weekend. I am open for suggestions and I have some ideas already. The image is from the infamous Atelier Populaire that I have referenced often enough and the lines everyone should know. If you want to drop some ideas, please, by all means do.
I also want to print a re-run of this one, possibly in a new version, as I don’t have mine anymore. Keen to have your feedback on this one also.
Last week I briefly spoke about the US censoring and / or banning books, once again, from the school’s curriculums, and we are going to have a more in-depth looks at this.
Banning, censoring and burning knowledge, both in shapes of books and people isn’t new, far from it. In modern history we have our own stories in Germany, but the idea of banning knowledge, essentially what books and people represent is hardly anything new. As far as we know today, the first recorded instance of goes back to 221 BCE, China with the burning of a library upon the founding of the Han Dynasty. This instance has much in common with the Spanish control of book imports into their new colonies, notably in Peru. Whilst the control of imports is much more banal than the burning of whole libraries, both forms of book censorship were performing the same function: to limit dissent within new societies. In all three of these instances the need for censorship relates to the fragility of new regimes, the Han Dynasty, the budding Spanish Empire, and Nazi Germany. Whilst the ongoing banning of ideas in schools, of all places, seems hugely out of place, authoritarian and frankly, counter-productive as well as a step back into history, it’s really not. Every empire, every power that existed has done this and it should not come as a surprise when a fading, yet powerful minority in the US is once again, reverting back to this method. I am not trying to downplay the most recent slew of bans in the US, on the contrary, it should be fought at every level, I did however want to point out the historical lineage of dying empires here.
Banning books is an effort, unknowingly, to resurrect the early modern Roman Catholic Counter-Reformation against both radical Catholics and early Protestants, which attempted to halt unauthorized reading, including curtailing the ability of individuals to read for themselves. Then seen as a “protest,” individual access to written or printed texts was perceived as threatening in ways that controlled oral reading to the “masses” by a priest or other leader was not. It enforced orthodoxy and countered both collective and individual autonomy.
The similarities and differences between today and a half millennium ago are powerful. Both movements are inseparable from ignorance, rooted in fear, and expressed in both legal and extralegal struggles for control and power. Both are inextricably linked to other efforts to restrict free speech, choice and control over one’s body, political and civil rights, public protests, and more.
This current movement in the U.S. harkens back well beyond the “ban books” and “read banned books” movements of the 1950s and ’60s, with their obsession with J.D. Salinger’s Catcher in the Rye, Harper Lee’s To Kill a Mockingbird, or Maya Angelou’s I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings. Even Anthony Comstock, secretary of the New York Society for the Suppression of Vice, who tried to use the U.S. Postal Service to limit the circulation of obscene literature and destroyed books, did not aim to empty libraries.
Although it would be nice to think that book banning has changed dramatically since the burning of a Chinese library in 221 BCE the reality is that whilst the methods for banning books have changed, the reasons for banning books remain the same – shutting out marginalised voices for fear of a change in social order. Whether it is the fear of Protestantism in a newly fractured Catholic church, the fear of political unrest in Nazi Germany, the fear of social equality in 1960s Britain, or the fear of marginalised viewpoints in the present world, all book banning revolves around fear of change. If all books that are banned are because of fear, that must mean that books are agents of change. Ultimately then, books are banned because of ‘their ability to represent ideas,’ and the fear for what would happen if those ideas became hegemonic.
Additionally, this most recent move by Republicans in the U.S. also plays into their warped concept of Freedom of Speech - a topic I could and have written entire dissertations on, from a philosophical stand point that essentially can be summarized as such:
If you want the freedom to say whatever you want, you will hear shit you don’t like.
Obviously, this is hugely nuanced and the above hugely simplified but here we are. For anyone looking to dig into this one though without having to wade through millennia of philosophical discourse, I suggest this most excellent book.
Amnesty International’s Report
Amnesty International released a report examining the realities in Israel and Palastine. Now, the obvious shit storm has already hit the fan, so deeply entrenched are the opposing sides here, which, however, shouldn’t stop you from reading this report, irrespective of where you stand on the issue.
Everyone knows my opinions on the matter and I have no issues proclaiming my solidarity with the Palestinian people suffering under various Israeli governments. My past actions there, here and our collective effort raising money has made that all too clear. I know and trust this community well enough to know that comments here are going to refrain from the idiotic calls of anti-semitism as well as supporting Hamas and such. The fact remains that this is a thorough piece of work and it should be read. Thoroughly and with the awareness that Amnesty itself is not without criticism, some of if justified, some of it drummed up in the above mentioned insanity.
Again, I am biased here and wouldn’t be able to join, let alone lead a debate about this, nor should I ever do that in any case, not only because of my bias, but we English have done enough damage in the Middle East to forever bar us from leading any debate revolving around the right of self-determination of any people. If I may suggest it though to those interested, listen to the people affected, keep an open mind and if at all possible, go. Listen, learn and help IF asked. It helped me. For your own sanity, do not ask any German to get involved here, Amnesty Germany has already declined to comment on the report due to the nations inability to discuss this subject and I’ll leave it at, otherwise my commentary will become extremely unsavoury. For anyone that want’s a quicker run down that is written extremely well, I suggest going through this thread below.
Spotify, that Podcasting Idiot & Neil Young
I only added this lunch doodle here because I didn’t want to use a picture of the air & meathead Rogan. I will be talking about this, but in Thursday’s 5th episode of Hot Shots and probably not in a way that you are expecting. On that note, you can still catch a glimpse of my home and this doof yapping about a number of things in last week’s episode here.
Web3 Is Doing Just Great
Thanks to my friend Robert I came across this wonderful blog, yes a damn blog, that focuses on all the fuckening surrounding the latest Ponzi Scheme from Silicon Valley. If you can’t be bothered to read the thousands of opinions surrounding this topic but would like to stay informed with a giggle, bookmark this site.
With that, I am signing off for now. I realize today’s topics aren’t the easiest to get through but that’s part of the deal, or rather a huge part of the deal. For the time being, I remain yours, without compromise,
V.