The Lady's not Returning

Yes this time its true April the 8th 2013 is the day that Margaret Thatcher died. Its been a long time coming but its finally here. To comemorate this Red Letter day I've composed my own special eulogy

The Day That Margaret Thatcher Died

 I’ll tell you true, I’ll tell you why
So many are happy to see Thatcher die.
She made it her most important role
To condemn millions to waste on the dole.
So tight was the woman called Thatcher
That for decades we knew her as “Milk Snatcher”.

The nickname was apt for she was the cream
Of the proponents of Milton Friedman’s dream.
For over ten years she reigned supreme
At the head of our most divisive regime.
Her favoured title was the “Iron Lady”
Though her favoured practices were quite shady.

Her response to the trouble on Stormont Hill?
A sinister order to “Shoot to kill”
An order that punished many whose only crime
Was to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.
When the Miners were on strike
She sent up the Met with a pay hike.
The people of Brixton were left in the lurch
Her solution? Stop and search.
Construction workers were trying to organise
Such an act would threaten her drive to privatise.
The solution she hid in bureaucratic mist
Was to agree to the bosses black list.

Still I’ll say this she was kind to her friends
That chosen few who enjoyed dividends.
Yes it was a good time to be in real estate
Or any position that could profit from the decline of the State.
A friend of Thatcher was here to stay
Just ask the Chilean butcher Pinochet.

Still that was all in the past
The shrill one is dead at last.
And the lie of Thatcherism
Will end like every other Despotism.
When the Working class
Shatter her legacy like glass.

For a more comprehensive list of reasons why I and many won't be sad on this day I'll leave you with Tony Benn.

April is the month of Poets

April is NaPoWriMo* which means its time for a special competition. You have to write 30 poems during the month of April, I'm taking part so I maybe a little quiet this month. Should you be interested you can see my completed and edited poems for the month here if your wondering why there's a few missing the event states that you have to complete 30 poems not submit them. In that folder are the ones I feel are worth being read.

Here's a sample

The Ballad of Big Bill

Born in 1869 was one William Haywood
By helping workers anyway he could
He determined to spend his life
Not on friends, sport or Wife
By lending us his calloused hand
He vowed we’d build a promised land.

Now William was no College Professor
Nor a staunch Moral Confessor.
He grew up big and strong
And rejected the beard long.
In fact Most working folk
On account of him being solid as an Oak
Dubbed our Will “Big Bill”

Big Bill began his rise to fame
Helping a Silver mine stake its claim.
Whilst picking at rock he listened to Ed Boyce
Ed’s speech would give Workers cause to rejoice.
Big Bill with the Western Federation of Miners
Staunch lads them, but their work could be finer.

In 1905 Big Bill really made his mark
That year Big Bill made his views stark.
Addressing over two hundred fellow travellers
Big Bill declared we were better than our masters.
The convention declared and its resolution heard,
That was the birth of the Industrial Workers of the World.

From the farm to the cotton mill
Every worker who had their fill
With the callous Capitalistic boss
And Union bureaucratic toss
Found a helping hand
From the folks in that Industrial Band.

“I only want to live to see the dream of the Red Labor International come true.
That’s all I want. That’s the I.W.W.”

*For the record, I hate the abbreviation but its catchy and I'm stuck with it.

Remembering Joe Hill

 One of the biggest reasons for interesting me in the work of the Industrial Workers of the World were its prolific work in protest and folk songs. The old IWW was rich in songwriters, arguably the most important (certainly the most famous) was Joe Hill a Swedish born organiser for the IWW. While in Utah he was arrested and tried for the murder of a shopkeeper and his son. The evidence was that Hill owned a Red Bandanna and had been treated for a gun shot wound that same night (as had four others) and that was it. He was executed by firing squad on the 19th November 1915.

 Joe Hill's Last Will

My will is easy to decide,
For there is nothing to divide.
My kin don't need to fuss and moan,
"Moss does not cling to a rolling stone."

My body? Oh, if I could choose
I would to ashes it reduce,
And let the merry breezes blow,
My dust to where some flowers grow.

Perhaps some fading flower then
Would come to life and bloom again.
This is my Last and final Will.
Good Luck to All of you,
Joe Hill

Joe Hill wrote some of the American Labour movements most popular songs including Casey Jones- Union Scab, Preacher and the Slave, There is power in the Union and Rebel Girl.

His example stuck with me so when I started writing pro-IWW poetry I decided to write this tribute to him.

The Death of Joe Hill

Joe Hill was shot down
By firing squad, they did it
Do not mourn for him

Joe Hill is dead now
But like Jesus he lives on
In our hearts and minds

Joe Hill left his will
He did not ask us to kill
But to Organise

A Simple Question

 Is the War on Terror worth the cost?




American Autumn is a documentary about the Occupy Movement and the political situation that made the occupation of public space an absolute necessity. It can be bought here under a pay what you can/want model.

The film was financed by kickstarter and I was one of its backers. After completion Dennis made it freely available for awhile on his youtube channel. However it appears Dennis is trying to raise funds for his webshow and other projects so has switched over to this method. I'm an ardent believer in the freedom of information but its important to fund alternative research and journalism. So on the whole I find this to be an acceptable compromise. It is available and can be gotten cheaply, what really annoys me is that most documentaries after being first broadcast go back on the shelf in some media archive never to see the light of day again. Most of the time if it wasn't for a foresighted viewer recording the show and then sharing it the information they contain would only be disseminated across a fraction of the audience.

But is America's Autumn worth any amount of money? I think so, though of course being one of the guys who put money up for its completion I'd look like a fool if I said otherwise. Its a well made documentary with a lot of interesting visuals. You can see an example of the graphics it uses to illustrate its points appoint the rottenness of America's political system. It also has footage and interviews from many of the Occupy encampments across America getting a representative sample of the people involved and what mattered most to them.

As we all know by now the camps have all been broken up by the police, but the movement itself, specifically the groups that affiliated or grew out of it haven't gone away. They are still active offering support to the desperete and challenging the banks and the governments agencies that support them.

For example one area that alot of Occupy activists are strongly involved in is resistance to the foreclosure crisis that threatens thousands with the prospect of homelessness. So far they haven't successfully stopped these evil policies but they have kept dozens of families in their homes. Some would call them small victories, I'd say those who say that have never faced the prospect of losing their home because their ain't nothing small about that. But regardless the fact that the movement still exists and is having some impact, makes it worth studying in my opinion and documentaries like American Autumn help raise are understanding.

From Free Speech Radio News

In Detroit, Michigan, the city many consider the epicenter of the nation's subprime loan and foreclosure crisis, banks continue to evict residents from their homes at an alarming pace. Wayne County has the second highest foreclosure rate in the state, according to RealtyTrac. But citizens are fighting back. Over the past year a growing grassroots movement has used community action to block evictions and keep families in their homes. Now, some of those helped by the movement are taking the reins of its leadership. FSRN's Jaisal Noor has more from Detroit.

Commandante Hugo Chavez has Died

El Presidente Hugo Chavez has died aged 58, after spending nearly two years battling cancer. The news doesn't surprise me anyone who has family or friends suffering from cancer knows how fragile it leaves them. Even if the treatments go well and they're "cured" it doesn't take much to floor them years after.

His death ends fourteen years in power (1999-2013) and was undeniably an important figure in Venezuelan and global affairs. I imagine the next few weeks we'll see a lot of back and forth as admirers and enemies battle it out to try and capture his legacy for their own purposes just like they do for the death of every major political figure regardless of beliefs and deeds. Speaking on purely personal grounds I'll miss the energetic demagogue and his trademark Red Beret. The man was an important influence on my political maturity from angry teen shaking his fist at news bulletins into something approaching a coherent thinker. Though I've definitely moved away from his orbit since then Chavez's actions did at least give me a direction to focus my energies and for that I will always remember him and be grateful. 

I first became aware of the Commandante of Caracas when watching an Irish documentary on BBC Four. That documentary was "The Revolution will not be Televised- Chavez: Inside the Coup"



I still watch the above video now and then. That documentary blew my mind, it clearly showed me that the old levers of control the United States government over Latin America were still there and ready to activate when ever any challenge to that control occurred. And reminded me that the ruling cliques of Latin America were just as ruthless and unethical in assisting the domination of Latin America that they personally profit from.

It also showed me that Chavez unlike the populist Latin leaders of the past had a genuine base of support amongst the poor and working class of Venezuela. The army and the media had moved against Chavez during the coup, in fact all the institutions of power in Venezuelan society had thrown their weight behind the movement to depose Chavez, and his political allies were weak and disorganised(1) with most of their leaders under arrest by the pro coup army and police. Even the country's established trade unions (whose leaders were closely tied to Chavez's political opponents) were against him.

The only power in Venezuela that did come out for Chavez and did face down the riot police and tanks on the streets were the people. The streets of Caracas and the major cities were full of angry citizens from the Barrios demanded his safe return. This groundswell of anger seems to have court the coup plotters completely of guard (understandably so, since they controlled the media completely and had spent months demonizing Chavez) and derailed their attempts to create a smooth transition of power before the rest of the world could react. I've never subscribed to the view that the working class is stupid or easily mislead so the fact that so much of Venezuela's working class mobilised to defend Chavez said a lot to me about his popularity and the sections of society he chose to represent.



"Those who have served the cause of the Revolution have ploughed the Sea" Simon Bolivar


1: The massive United Socialist Party of Venezuela wasn't formed until 2007 long after the coup.

Kim Jong Unbelievable the Red Dawn Remake

Well I finally got round to watching the Red Dawn remake, and many things come to mind. Since I believe a work should stand separate from its baggage like intended messages and the people attached to it I'll try to break up my criticism and praise into individual sections.


The Film

If your a reader of this blog you can probably guess what will be in the following sections so it only seems fair to start by dealing with the film as piece of cinema in as much of a vacuum as possible.

I fully believe these are battle hardened teens scarred by the horror of war

Unfortunately the film doesn't really shape up. It uses obvious CG which isn't to bad in itself but the execution is quite poor. The invasion involves a massive fleet of air planes depositing the CG paratroopers, this is very noisy and some of the planes are shot down and crash near are main characters. They flee but the following scenes have extras strolling down the streets while the CG paratroopers are just above roof height. The Korean soldiers when they do become real are incompetent fools whom just mill about despite being under fire. The first time they actually do anything they manage to get one of themselves killed by a panicky teen while the rest of them just stand and watch the killer of their comrade escape. We also meet are main villain Captain Cho (Will Yun Lee) who is quite possible the worst officer in non comedic film history.

He keeps that confused expression throughout

After our hero's escape by driving away past several Korean riflemen, Cho decides that despite being in charge and having captured the Mayor (presumably the most important object at the moment) to take off after our hero's in a car chase with only a driver. Oh yeah despite parachuting in minutes ago the Koreans have fully fuelled and prepared armoured vehicles. Anyway he quickly crashes and our hero's make their way to the woods to begin planning their Guerilla counter-offensive and practice there chant of "Wolverines"!

And Cho and the Koreans maintain that level of incompetence throughout. Part of the problem is that Cho in particular is written as a movie villain and not as real military officer. The first explicitly evil thing we see him do directly hinders his own plans. He's in charge of this district and wants the kids whom injured several soldiers to turn themselves in. To do this he tracks them down and gets two of the kids dad's to talk to the woods were they're hiding with a megaphone. He promises if they turn themselves in no one gets hurt, but the cop dad of (ex marine) uses the opportunity to tell his kids to fight back. So Cho like a bond villain shoots him meaning there's no chance the kids will turn themselves in. He then leaves making no attempt to search the woods for them.

The Korean soldiers from that point on become storm troopers only from Star Wars, they never hit anything, their armour is useless and they spend the film running or driving around aimlessly becoming perfect ambush material. But sometimes they also just stand their letting obviously suspicious individuals get right up to them before they do anything even after several attacks have occurred. Nothing kills the tension in a film like having the main enemy force be completely useless. Oh and Cho's superiors don't appear much better, we get a standard dressing down from your superiors scene after Cho completely fails to deal with that gang of meddling kids. Cho assures his boss it'll be other soon, which pleases him, but when Cho actually tries to tell him what he's planning the Boss yells "Enough talk"! and storms off.

 The acting was, well it was functional I guess. No one stuck out as doing a poor job but no one really shined either. In fact I honestly can't remember any of the Wolverines names other then Daryl (because he was the Black one), and I could only tell the girls apart by their hair colours. At about the middle point one of the male wolverines was shot and honestly I couldn't remember which one had been killed. I couldn't remember who else had been hanging around with them prior to his death. Cho isn't scary; he's just there not really doing much, I only remember his name because everyone else kept mentioning him as if he was some sort of threat despite spending most of his time in an office and showing no military skills whatsoever.

The story copies most of the events from the original only it manages to make them worse. For example the death of the traitor, now despite my problems with the original Red Dawn I can at least watch it and as a film it was very good, characters even the bad guys had if not depth then layers, they did a reasonable job of explaining how the kids were able to take on the new Red Army, and did a very good job juxtaposing the jubilant Wolverines with the repression of the occupation. I still find the premise absurd but I did believe the kids were struggling to cope with an extremely bad situation and the film did a very good job of portraying the bleak existence in an occupation and in capturing a sense of dread and frustration as the occupation developed.

And again this is something the remake botches, in the original it was made clear that the group hid in the wilderness for at least a month getting to know the territory and perfecting their survival skills and accuracy with a gun. The remake has a fast paced montage and makes it seem like only a day or two has passed since the Koreans invaded making there ability to take on the army so easily ludicrous. In Red Dawn Colonel Bella is shown to be a very good commander, he's cool under fire and he defeats the American forces despite equipment shortages and very quickly establishes the new regime. He's also not afraid to challenge his superiors when his instincts tell him their wrong. But since he's Nicaraguan his entire military experience has been fighting with insurgents not against them(1) so by his own admission he's out of his depth. And his superiors don't help him they just keep instructing him to squeeze and kill the population under his control. Cho on the other hand displays no expertise in any capacity and has no justification for failing to contain the rebellion.

In particular the subplot with the traitor, its probably my favourite part of the film since it deals with probably the most complex and ugly aspect of conflict, how do you deal with a friend and fellow fighter whom turns, and what exactly causes them to turn. His reasons for what he did were perfectly understandable, even more so when you remember his age and the execution was depicted very brutally and managed to avoid glorifying his death as a victory for Patriotism. In fact in addition to being traumatic it was unnecessary there was no reason to kill the prisoner and the traitor his tracking device meant the Soviets were following him. All the Wolverines had to do was leave (which they had to do anyway since Daryl had given away their position) and leave them both for the Soviets to find. Not only is there murder unnecessary but they can't even come up with a convincing argument to shoot either of them, they just do it.

In the remake the traitor kid is an arrogant prick from the start, sells out his "friends" immediately (about 20 minutes in) and dies with without much comment after one of the "loyal Wolverines" gives him the middle finger. Not exactly on the same level of emotional drama is it?

And what about the strategic situation scene, you know the one were the Wolverines meet up with some soldiers whom tell them all how screwed up the situation actually is and how the Soviets were able to do all this. That was an important scene in Red Dawn not only did it give some credence to premise by giving a detailed operation involving multiple forces and points of attack. It also added to the atmosphere of grim defiance, basically the war is in a stalemate but every front is deep within American territory.

In the remakes version its revealed that the North Koreans have essentially a magic weapon that's so advanced the US had no idea such a thing could exist that disabled America's defences. Okay to be fair the weapon is a type of E-bomb which is a device that sets off a large Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) that fries electrical devices. They do exist and a lot of money is being spent on making better version, the problem is that money is Dollars and Yuans because the technology is so sophisticated and expensive effectively only America and China can  produce them. And apparently they used tactical "non-nuke"Warheads (missiles to us common civvies) to take down remaining resistance. The scene also jettisons the bleak seriousness of the original in favour of a trite "guys like you are the difference" where there's hope there's a way sentimentality popularised by children's television.

Oh and that scene informs us the Russians have invaded too. I guess the Russian market must be less profitable or less thin skinned. Why is never explained, in fact no explanation is given for the North Koreans being there. The original didn't really give a reason for the Soviet invasion(2) beyond "it was inevitable, two powerful kids on the block" but it didn't really need to. The Cold War of the time answered that question for them, USA and USSR were locked in a struggle and had the power to destroy each other. Ergo the USSR would have reason to defeat the Americans and benefit greatly if it pulled it off.

Oh and they change the ending too. Red Dawn had most of the Wolverines die its implied that the disruption of groups like the Wolverines and the hope they inspired helped turn the tide of the war but they still ended up dead. In the remake the group lead a mass insurgency on a prison camp exploiting the Korean guards fatal flaw of just standing there waiting to get shot.

Plot

 You might be wondering why plot comes after the section about the film. Well I've seperated it because films that have an explicit message have two plots, the one the actors go through and the narrative the audience are supposed to go through. And you can't get more explicit then the propaganda of the Red Dawn films.

The plot for the benefit of the Red Dawn films is quite obvious "Fear the foreign powers". The original film was in essence a 114 minute advert for increased spending on America's war programs. The fact that the invaders are a bunch of Commies is actually a footnote its the fact foreign powers can trample American soil that's supposed to frighten the audience. The Soviet Union was merely the most realistic choice of antagonists. The tag line for the film makes this clear "In our time, no foreign army has ever occupied American soil. Until now."(3)

I never really liked the original Red Dawn and I freely admit at least part of my dislike is the films propaganda message. Not only do I simply disagree with "My country tis for thee" Jingoism in reality those sentiments have been used to justify the most evil of actions. The film doesn't just ape the pro war and aggression arguments in general either the original actively presents some of the Right wing arguments for interventions and atrocities as being true. How do the Soviet Union manage to launch a surprise invasion of the United States? By using there foothold in Latin America, specifically Cuba and Nicaragua.

At the time the film was made Ronald Reagan and his national security clique were funnelling millions of dollars and weapons to the most appalling regimes and armies in Latin America, torture, rape and genocide were the norms throughout most of the continent. How could the "greatest democracy on earth" possibly justify such appalling crimes? The Russians are coming. Why invade Grenada? The Cubans and Russians were going there. Why create the Contra's, a force cobbled together from the remnants of Somoza's National Guard? The Russians might go there. Why support the Salvadoran Generals in their Genocidal crackdown on the Indiginado peasants? If they win the Russians will go there. And on and on it went.  Hell it even indulges in some immigrant bashing by claiming a bunch of illegals from Mexico managed to infiltrate a number of military installations before the attacks. In addition to the standard racist distrust of people who "aren't native" the events of the time make it even more sinister. American laws forbade the funding and support of those committing crimes against humanity which meant the tide of Latin American refugees trying to escape the brutalities of their own governments were a problem. Accepting refugee's would be an admission by the US government that their allegations of persecution and torture were true, so instead many whom applied were denied accused of lying and supporting the local "Red faction" and sent back home with the government they fled knowing who they are. So many had to flee to America illegally. So by using the arguments of the US interventionist wing Red Dawn was in effect helping their arguments be accepted by the American people.

Still It was lucky for the film makers that the existence of the Soviet Union provided the perfect example of foreign aggression. In terms of Anti Red propaganda its not the worse film I've seen, that honour goes to Red Scorpion a rather dull film that was made to support UNITA (the guys who worked with South Africa) in Angola's Civil war. In it a KGB superman is sent to kill a "Black Revolutionary" however switches sides when he sees Soviet and Cuban forces killing the local population. I remember one scene in particular were the head Soviet Officer gasses a village from a helicopter.

You could easily take the plot of Red Dawn and set it at any other time period when America was under threat and only have to change the locations, extras and props. For example set it in Hawaii in the 40's make the baddies Japanese  and replace the Hind's with Zero's. Or set it in ye olde Colonial times, have the baddies be Brits (a mix of bluebloods and cockneys, naturally) and you've got the same film. In fact you wouldn't even have to change the title, Red Dawn could easily reference the Red Sun on the Imperial flag or the Red Coats of the regulars.

Unfortunately for the remake they have no such luck. Originally the enemy was going to be the only potential candidate for threat to America China, but the studio's got cold feet so they spent a lot of time in post production changing them to North Koreans (more on this below). This change means that its propaganda message is worthless the example chosen to illustrate the point is so poor it simply discredits the entire argument. North Korea couldn't possibly invade the United States and that's evident to anyone with a working brain. They might as well have made the enemy Zambia, at least then they'd do well with the racist Turner Diaries crowd.

Possibly the dumbest decision made by Hollywood in a few years

And here we go, the decision to give the Chinese a race lift to make them Koreans is just a fundamentally stupid idea. On every front it just weakens the film even more. The decision to change the country was simply because the studio wanted access to the lucrative Chinese market which immediately kills the films artistic integrity and shows the film is purely a moneymaking scheme of no substance. The change weakens the plot drastically and contradicts the "gritty ultra serious" tone the film desperately wants to have.

It also changes the plot in other less obvious ways, the original Red Dawn had the invasion occur because America simply wasn't vigilant enough. If the enemy was still China they might still be able to pull off the same thing but not with North Korea. The very beginning of the film shows the 21st century equivalent of the spinning newspaper montage, clips of 24 hour news commentary around the world. Lots of films do this as its actually a fairly effective and unobtrusive way of ex-positing the situation setting the tone, usually tension. And to be fair to the film it does a reasonable job of presenting North Korea as a threat in the made up scenario it constructs, unfortunately it makes the subsequent invasion of America look to be the product of America's lack of intelligence rather then a lack of vigilance.

The beginning news montage makes clear that America was well aware of North Korea's danger and actively trying to restore order on the Korean peninsula and the globe. So the fact that they didn't see a military build up in particular its Navy and Air Force both of which would be needed just so the Koreans could get over to America, and then let that Navy and Air force sneak past America's Pacific fleet and monitoring stations just kind of makes Uncle Sam seem really stupid. Its the kind of incompetence that no amount of dollars in the defence budget can solve.

Oh and what makes the decision to make the baddies Koreans completely redundant is the addition of the Russians. Near the beginning the characters say the Koreans must of had help, that would've made for an interesting subplot an international conspiracy of nations and if done well could update Red Dawns "Fear the foreigner" message. But no the film drops that thread only to introduce Russians half way through without explanation. They literally just turn up half way through and then disappear until the last ten or so minutes. They call them Spetsnaz but they don't really do much thats Special. The one thing they do manage to pull off (which is one more then the Koreans) is plant a tracker on Daryl (whose traitor subplot was given to some new character) meaning the Russians rather then the Koreans are the only bad guys whom threaten are band of misfits. Why not just make them Russians in the first place, they were already remaking Red Dawn so they couldn't have been afraid of parallels with the original.

In conclusion track down a DVD of the original if your curious.

1: Apparently the Contra's don't exist in Red Dawn world.
2: Okay the opening text at the beginning does explain the specifics of why the Soviets attack but the characters don't know that.
3: Which of course isn't quite true, British forces occupied "American soil" twice if you count territory held by Washington's forces as American soil. Then there was Mexico which launched offensives during its wars with America. Hell the Canadians also occupied territory on their way to burn down the non white White house.

Hakim Bey the Anarcho-paedophile

If you've read this blog for more then a second or two you'd quickly realise that I'm a weird fellow. For example one of my favourite pastimes after stamp collecting is what's been called by some "Lefty trainspotting". Its an easy activity to get into but is very time consuming. Basically it involves trawling the net for forum threads and blog posts and news stories by various radical and left wing groups about each other. I'm sure we're all familiar with the Python's life of Brian gag about Judea having over a dozen Revolutionary groups all with same aim and suspiciously similar names, whom spend more time fighting each other then they do the Romans their supposed common enemy.

Well its a bit like that, since many of these groups are competing for the same space and for one reason or another unable or unwilling to work together in any practical capacity they really go for each others jugulars. Sure sometimes it can be very boring when all the two or more sides do is through quotes and made up terms at each other. But you'd be surprised what else gets brought up in these squabbles. Everyone whose anyone has had their dirty laundry aired from affairs, convictions past associations to weird speeches,I've seen some proper train wrecks unfold. Take for example the CPGB's Weekly Worker some have accused of being nothing more that a rumour rag. Currently all four of its featured stories are about the Socialist Workers Party, three about the ongoing feud over that scandal of a CC member sexually harassing and raping female members only for his mates on the Central Committee to back him up. And the other is about the failures of the Stop the War Coalition a movement closely associated with the SWP whom is also blamed for its failure and breakdown.

However while incidents like the above infighting in the SWP show sometimes an event can be notable and interesting whilst still being cringing and awful to watch unfold. As much as I dislike the SWP I'd rather wish the sexual harassment didn't occur and I certainly wish that once it did and came out in the open the Parties leadership had more backbone then to cover for a mate.

Still as rotten as that episode is there is something far worse bubbling away on the radical fringe. Like a disease it goes by several names, sometimes he goes by the name Peter Lamborn Wilson though he's more commonly known as Hakim Bey (and for brevity I'll be referring to him by that name).

Bey (pictured) Is an American social commentator and oddball. He's also known as an Anarchist and gets quite a bit of media attention for providing "Anarchist" and "Anti-authoritarian" critiques and readings of many subjects. He's also an admitted paedophile (more on this below) most of his works from poetry to essays has been published in NAMBLA's news bulletin and he explicitly uses Anarchist language and terms to justify his Paedophilia.

That he's a Paedophile and still able to come and go as he pleases without some form of monitoring when many of his ilk are is quite strange, the fact that his prestige has given him a pulpit to publicly air his views is dangerous as well as very sickening. Anarchists get a bad press, the typical image of an Anarchist is either a fuse lit bomb wielding lone nut, a head butting punk rocker, or a teenage vandal, as such they really don't need creeps like Bey adding friends of child molesters to the list.

Now of course every group, organisation and tribe over a certain size is bound to have a few crackpots and creeps within them but what sets Bey above the usual (I don't want to say common) paedophile is that he uses the language and beliefs of the group he claims to belong to and represent -in this case Anarchism- to justify his perversion and even give it some respectability. That means he's muddying the image of the group by his association. Had he been an Anarchist (or whatever) lecturer or thinker whom it emerged was paedophile that would still be terrible but it would not or at least should not have negative consequences for anyone but himself.

 If your sceptical of the dangers that people like Bey (whom use other groups and movements to cloak them) represent then look at the example of the LGBT community. What was one of most common accusation hurled at Gay's and less often Bi's to justify why their sexualities were wicked and sick? Paedophilia. For a long time it was assumed all Paedo's were Gay, and that was all the proof needed to justify its criminalisation and its stigma in public. In Britain we have two slang terms, Ponce and Nonce, Ponce means homosexual and Nonce means Paedophile though the terms were often interchangeable.

And of course the association of Gay=child molester was actively encouraged by Paedophiles since the Gay rights movement started organising in the West in the late Seventies in order to gain sympathy and acceptance for their own activities. To this day you can still find bigots trotting out the old "Queers rape kids" argument, usually to oppose the formal entry of homosexuals into organisations like the Scouts.

 
Now paedophilia is a very serious accusation and I wouldn't be comfortable making that accusation even when others already have without proof. Fortunately I have plenty.

Now before I continue I'm warning you now, some of the stuff quoted and linked from this point on will be graphic descriptions of sexual activity with or about children. It's very sickening stuff. Leave now if you don't think you can handle it.

Probably Bey's most famous work is the clumsily titled The Temporary Autonomous Zone, Ontological Anarchy, Poetic Terrorism (T.A.Z.)

You can read it in full on his website now looking at the first few sentences you may wonder where's the issue well I did too when I was first made aware of Hakim's ways. Some said that TAZ was mainly a justification for Paedophilia since its about establishing temporary zones were laws and social boundaries no longer apply but it seemed like a bit of reach. Then someone showed following quotes

"Many people assume that because I sometimes express myself as an anarchist boy-lover, I must also be "interested" in other ultra-postmodern ideas like serial child-murder,"

The above is taken from the sixth paragraph of the one of the later sections called "Against the reproduction of death". He quite clearly admits to being a "boy-lover" but also an "Anarchist Boy-lover" clearly confirming his attempts to link the two. I and others have brought this up with supporters of Bey (and yes he has supporters) the only answer I've ever received is to claim misinterpretation or taken out of context. The latter is simply false the passage is fully in context he admits to being a boy lover then denies that he's also into child murder. And how can you interpret " I sometimes express myself as an anarchist boy-lover," to be anything other then an admission of paedophilia? the term Boy lover is a euphemism for the molestation of young males, NAMBLA (Which I remind you all stands for North American Man Boy Love Association) is an organisation designed specifically to abolish age of consent laws to make sex with young boys legal.

The only other possible explanation is that Bey isn't a Paedophile (which is false) but for what ever reason chooses to identify as one. Remember he said "I sometimes express myself" not "I am often smeared with insults and false allegations as" and if that is the case as weird as it may be you need to prove it to be the case.

Two paragraphs further down in the same section we have this worrying admission 

"Sometimes I've used dangerous stupifiants like religion, marijuana, chaos, the love of boys."

I hope for his sake and those who turn a blind eye to his ways that by "Used the love of boys" he means tried being attracted to boys and not what I fear is an admission of actual sexual congress with a child.

The above is abhorrent but its only a few passages in a long rambling work, perhaps we could give Mr Bey the benefit of the doubt? Can we hell I have plenty more. A group that Bey is very closely linked to is Ontological Anarchy (remember it being in the title of T.A.Z.) and his website(s) maintain a lot of info on the work and ideas of Ontologicals. On a page titled Communiques of the Association of Ontological Anarchy http://www.t0.or.at/hakimbey/taz/taz2a.htm  we have a list of proposed propaganda idea number three was and I quote

 3. Paste up in public places a xerox flyer, photo of a beautiful twelve-year-old boy, naked and masturbating, clearly titled: THE FACE OF GOD.

I which this was the end of it but it just keeps on going. Most of Bey's works including the aforementioned T.A.Z were published by NAMBLA either in its bulletin or Gayme a members only magazine and as the title hints another attempt to link Paedophilia and homosexuality. Source

Some Bey supporters when confronted with Bey's sordid publication history have come up with the poor and completely unsubstantiated claim that NAMBLA published his work without his knowledge. This is easy to disprove as even the partial list compiled so far as the period in question stretch from 1985 to 1997 and in addition Bey submitting author notes to accompany many of his pieces appearing in those publications. In particular his poetry.

I gave a warning before but I'm going to give one again I'm about to reproduce one of Bey's poems in full. It is without a shadow of a doubt the sickest thing I've ever read (and I've read Mein Kampf, and other other tracts about race murder and rape) and I'm thankful for the computers ability to copy and paste because there is no way in hell I'd type it out.

It's called My Political Beliefs (we'll get to why afterwards)

barelegged on his bicycle in the park he rides beneath
a children's fountain droplets catch his hair which
the afternoon makes somewhat bronze, beaded with molten dew
--the sunset over Jersey like an industrial krakatoa:
Newark Gold, Secaucus Red, East Orange.
The button on his blazer: Anarchist Bicyclists
he's in the bathtub, I see
him through a crack in the door playing with himself, he calls me in, shows me
underwater push-ups and sit-ups, except for his gallic buttocks his skin is gilt as the air over the Hudson. The touch of his wet, bath-wrinkled fingers in my hand... but then...
one of his parents clumps down the hall... I suppose to make sure neither of us is raping the other...
[chorus of groans] Ohhh! for a
Buster-Keaton-bomb all spherical & black as coaldust with sweet sparkling with sweet sparkling fuse a mindbomb to
Drop on the Idea of the Family! O for a libertarian isle of runaways! O goodnight
Moon, I am lost, actually lost without him
But I didn't want this to be
Just another poem about hopeless love. Pretend it's a manifesto instead. Down with School! Boy Rule OK! In the land of dreams
No governance exists
But that of anarchs and kings, for dreamers have not yet learned to vote or think past the unfurling of the moment. He touches my cheek, runs delicate fingers through the hairs on my arm.
My liege shatters all Law for a triple kiss.
--Hakim Bey

For the record I first stumbled upon that vile tract when googling the title after hearing so much about it from his critics. I found it here and the articles author claimed the poem first appeared in the June 1986 edition of NAMBLA's bulletin. Returning to this list  for a moment we see that it does indeed appear in the list, same title same edition.

Why was it called "my political beliefs" well according to the last stanza's were Bey starts talking to the reader he

"didn't want this to be
Just another poem about hopeless love. Pretend it's a manifesto instead. Down with School! Boy Rule OK! In the land of dreams
No governance exists"

 No governance hey, were have I heard that before I wonder? I rest my case.

Just a few more things before I wrap up, one finally argument I've known Bey supporters to declare (sadly even after that poem was thrown in their faces) that its all a big media conspiracy. This is again false, I was actually surprised when I realised I had heard of Bey before I discovered his paedophile activism, when interviewed or asked for comment in my experience the media treated him like any other counter cultural type, a bit eccentric but that was it. And you at home can prove this claim to false too, simply go to google (or any search engine of your choice) and type in Hakim Bey plus any combination of Paedophile/NAMBLA/boylove etc. and see who comes up. In my experience there's only two types of people seriously talking about Bey's paedophilia and his attempts to link it to Anarchism. They are Anarchists themselves who are understandably appalled at Bey's merging of their ideals and worried about being associated with him, and anti paedophile activist groups. For example you may of heard of the campaign to boycott online retailers of books (especially amazon) for there allowance of a mostly second hand market for pro paedophile literature (no not Lolita the real deal) guess who happens to be on the "watch out" list? That's right Mr Bey they've also dug up some interesting reviews that lend credence to the fears that Bey is actively causing harm for the groups he claims to belong.

these books are now out of print, many of them can be found for sale on Amazon.com. And just who is buying them?

tj

perhaps not the "greatest poet", which is terminlly hubristic at worst and utterly naive at best, but certainly among the most beautifully and toically relevant poets of all time here at bC...

Anacreon

In case you haven't seen it, I highly recommend Hakim Bey's extremely relevant essay "Boycott Cop Culture." It's from the 90's, but still perfectly valid.

Now I haven't read "Boycott Cop Culture" so I have no idea what its about, it doesn't appear in the list of works published by NAMBLA/Gayme, so it could be a standard Anarch critique of the police, but given his track record I'm doubtful.

Humanist

A number of anarchists, most notably Hakim Bey, are quite open about their pedophilia, and anarchist bookstores and infoshops are often sources of literature supportive of childlove.

Itinerant giggle

I'm seeking possible leads for a girllove equivalent of the writings of the antinomian mystic boylover Hakim Bey (aka Peter Lamborn Wilson).

Enochian

Writer Hakim Bey was a well known individual in both the Anarchist and BL communities.

At least one of his fans (Aztram AKA Harold Spurling) was convicted of sexually abusing children (one of whom was just three months old) not don't misunderstand me as loathsome as Bey and his work is he didn't force Harold Spurling to commit his crimes, Spurling is the main culprit, however Bey's "non standard" poetry clearly help normalise Harold's sickness, he even borrows a quote by Bey in explaining his love of boys.

Another one of Wilsons pedophile readers, Harold Spurling is currently in trial, facing charges for sexually abusing a three month old baby and numerous other children:

Aztram AKA Harold Spurling

Personally, I'm well beyond the point of needing to ask myself WHY boys, to me, are "the shining gems in an otherwise lustreless world." [Thanks to Hakim Bey for that exquisite line.] I don't care why.

Aztram AKA Harold Spurling

He's my fave, too. Especially, shall we say, his "non-standard" poetry. Maybe that comes off as redundant.

 Now one final point before I finish (and I hope never to have to return to this sorry subject) some have argued that while Bey's attractions are deplorable can we not separate a man/woman from his work? In general I agree with this view but have two big reservations with this argument applying to Bey. First a work can only stand alone if the author gives it the ability too, Beys in my opinion (at least a lot of it) doesn't because he's intertwined his Anarchism with his Paedophilia T.A.Z. his most political work was about creating a space were laws and societal norms no longer existed (if only for a time) were the individual can do what to them feels good. And what by his own admission in that very text makes him feel good "Loving boys" which means he conceived of T.A.Z. At least in part to create some sort of "safe zone" for Paedophiles. I don't have to bring up the fact it was published in NAMBLA again do I?

It is possible to have good politics while being a terrible person, sticking with Anarchism Proudhon the first man to call himself an Anarchist was a vicious Anti-Semite. I don't mean he made a few non PC jokes about them being greedy, he called them the enemy of mankind and advocated their destruction.

Demand its expulsion from France with the exception of those individuals married to French women. Abolish synagogues and not admit them to any employment. Finally, pursue the abolition of this religion. It’s not without cause that the Christians called them deicide. The Jew is the enemy of humankind. They must be sent back to Asia or be exterminated. By steel or by fire or by expulsion the Jew must disappear.

So why then are the works of Proudhon so easily available when arguably his position as the first Anarchist (self identifying anyway) would make his views even more dangerous to Anarchism? Because it kept those views private, the quote above is from his private journal his actual published works were separate from his rather worrying hatred.

But lets say I'm wrong I freely admit I haven't read everything by Bey some works my have value and be detached from his obsessions. And if thats the case shouldn't they be fine to read and discuss? Sure, but if that is the case there is something incredibly important you need to do if dealing with his work. And that is to acknowledge his many problems and criticise him for it. Every work or piece by him should have a big disclaimer disavowing Bey's more questionable activities and beliefs. Letting him get away with publishing his dross without comment or challenge is akin to enabling those activities and contributing to their normalisation to a wider audience.

You might have heard about Jimmy Savile a prolific paedophile who for years got away with abusing and raping many young girls whilst being a very prominent and well known celebrity often lauded for his work for children. From his backstage dressing room to boarding schools and children's wards he victimised many teens. There were rumours for a very long time that he was a paedophile due to some very odd and very public behaviour so why then was he able to get away with it until his death? That's a very complex question some claim he was protected by both his bosses at the BBC and friends in the press and government but I think it also had something to do with the fact that no one really challenged or questioned him about his dodgy behaviour. The closest he got to a grilling was years after the fact on a Louis Theroux documentary.

When people fail to confront shall we call it a "bad habit" in a friend or acquaintance it gives it room to develop and go further, whether it be Alcohol addiction, theft, bigotry, or in this case paedophilia. That's why its very important to confront these things when they occur. Keeping silent does nothing but help things get worse.

 The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.

The quote is quite worn but its truth like that of Bey's paedophilia is undeniable.