*insurrection

6

Athens, Greece: 26/02/2015: No illusions about fairy tale left wing governments as anarchists take to the streets to express their rage in the first serious anti-state rally since the Syriza regime swept to power. A cop car has been torched, as have several other vehicles, barricades, fire and rioting continues at the time of this writing with the clashes now having moved to the Exarchia district, notorious anarchist stronghold in Athens. Photos stolen from various twitter accounts, info provided by our comrade in Athens.

If the unemployed person removes his piercings, goes to the barber and keeps himself busy with “projects,” if he really works on his “employability,” as they say, it’s because this is how he demonstrates his mobility. Mobility is this slight detachment from the self, this minimal disconnection from what constitutes us, this condition of strangeness whereby the self can now be taken up as an object of work, and it now becomes possible to sell oneself rather than one’s labor power, to be remunerated not for what one does but for what one is, for our exquisite mastery of social codes, for our relational talents, for our smile and our way of presenting ourselves. This is the new standard of socialization
—  the coming insurrection
A revolution is not a dinner party, or writing an essay, or painting a picture, or doing embroidery; it cannot be so refined, so leisurely and gentle, so temperate, kind, courteous, restricted and magnanimous. A revolution is an insurrection, an act of violence whereby one class overthrows another.
—  Daniel P. Ritter cites Mao Zedong in The Iron Cage of Liberalism

JOHN BROWN- "America’s First Domestic Terrorist "

He was an American revolutionary abolitionist, who in the 1850s advocated and practiced armed insurrection as a means to abolish slavery in the United States. He led the Pottawatomie Massacre during which five men were killed in 1856.. This was one of the many bloody episodes in Kansas preceding the American Civil War, which came to be known collectively as Bleeding Kansas.  He made his name in the unsuccessful raid at Harpers Ferry in 1859. Later that year he was executed but his speeches at the trial captured national attention. Brown has been called “the most controversial of all 19th-century Americans” and “America’s first domestic terrorist.” 

Thought to be the earliest portrait of John Brown, this daguerreotype was made by the African American photographer Augustus Washington. Produced in 1846 or 1847—about a decade before Brown’s raid on Harpers Ferry—the image shows Brown with a hand raised, calling to mind the pledge he made to fight for the eradication of slavery. Brown was living at this time in Springfield, Massachusetts, and, finding himself increasingly stirred by the anti-slavery fervor emanating from Boston, he had begun planning for armed action against slave-holding Southerners.

Image: Augustus Washington/National Portrait Gallery

http://en.academic.ru/dic.nsf/enwiki/47148

http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/02/the-50-most-powerful-images-from-the-civil-war/251998/

WHAT’S ON: Jesse Hlebo: In Pieces. January 16—February 28, 2015. Edel Assanti, 74A Newman Street, London, W1T 3DB.

Hlebo explores manifold incidences of crisis in a globalized society: insurrection, economic collapse, the Anthropocene and authoritarian control. With urgency befitting of the subject matter, Hlebo interrogates the media’s role in crisis creation and propagation, whilst highlighting possible trajectories from our present course.

Courtesy the artist and Edel Assanti, London. 

See Jesse Hlebo’s SculptureNotebook Featured Artist posts here.

For example Simon Schama claims ‘The whole sans-culotte “movement”, at its height in Paris was made up of no more than two to three thousand committed revolutionary zealots’. So all the meetings, the clubs, the storming of the Bastille, retrieving the royals from Versailles, invading the stores, the insurrections and eventually the Terror were all carried out by 2-3000 extremely busy people. Not only that but the reversal of every aspect of society and ideology was allowed to take place against the will of the other 25 million, who let 2-3000 get on with it.
— 

Mark Steel, Vive la Revolution.

This is probably the most important part of this book so far because Steel has an agenda - he is a socialist, and he’s here to defend the revolution, he makes uses of a modern language and concepts to defend it (words like activist) and he’s quite clear about that. But what interests me, what he’s good at is not exactly the defense of the revolution but at pin pointing the flaws of those who mindlessly attack it. Of course that not all of those who stormed the Bastille, who went to Versailles or who were in the clubs were sans-culotte. And of course that there was a significant resistence to the Revolution (I mean, there was a civil war) and I don’t think we should dismiss the people who resisted the revolution as having no mind of their own and opposing “progress” because those people have agency too, like those who supported the revolution, they had motives, and context that explain their resistence and personally I would not say that they are “the evil ones” as opposed to the sans-culottes and the Paris radicals who are the “good ones” because I don’t think History works within that dycothomy.

However, Steel is right when he says you really can’t downplaying the role of the sans-culotte or the extent of the radical movement or those more radical or more moderate who supported the Revolution because if there were a lot of people who didn’t support it, there were also a lot of people who sympathized with the revolutionary claims and ideals, even if they were not in the clubs or yelling for aristocrats to be put to death. He adds: 

Revolutionary action does usually involve a committed minority, but that applies to state-led action as well as to opposition. (…) The sans-culotte activists who drove the revolution were a minority, but a far bigger minority than 2-3000. Just as important, they would have been helpless unless they had won support at some level from the majority. If 3.000 people in London in 2003 erected a guillotine and started invading Royal palaces and cutting off their opponent’s heads, they d’be stopped. A revolution can run on the activity of a minority but only if they connect it to the aspirations of the majority.

This is why archives are important and why the continual study of our work is crucial. This is why it is important that work by visionary black thinkers be collected in archives. Ones that are first and foremost accessible to those who are engaged in the process of decolonization. We know how easily, how quickly our words are forgotten, our histories buried. We all know that students, even our women’s studies students, often show no hint of recognition when we talk about the works of Pat Parker, Lorraine Hansberry, Barbara Christian, Endesha Mae Holland, June Jordan, Octavia Butler, and even Audre Lorde…As we all know, there are a small number of individual black women writers who have managed to engage in the insurrection of subjugated knowledge…yet we can still all read celebrated theory by white women which builds on this work without any mention of the individual black women thinkers who laid the foundation. To resist this erasure, we must do all we can to document, to highlight, to study, to celebrate, and most important to create work that is cutting edge, that breaks through silences.
2

John Brown American Abolitionist Who Believed Armed Insurrection Was The Only Way To Overthrow The Institution Of Slavery In The United States

Americans might ask how they should remember John Brown. Was he a bloodthirsty zealot, a vigilante, a terrorist, or a madman? Or was he one of the great heroes of American history? a freedom fighter and martyr to the cause of human liberty?

Although initially shocked by Brown’s exploits, many Northerners began to speak favorably of the militant abolitionist. “He did not recognize unjust human laws, but resisted them as he was bid… .,” said Henry David Thoreau in an address to the citizens of Concord, Massachusetts. “No man in America has ever stood up so persistently and effectively for the dignity of human nature… .” John Brown was in the evolution of the United States “The Man Who Killed Slavery, Sparked the Civil War, and Seeded Civil Rights.”

John Brown was a man of action — a man who would not be deterred from his mission of abolishing slavery. On October 16, 1859, he led 21 men on a raid of the federal arsenal at Harpers Ferry, Virginia. His plan to arm slaves with the weapons he and his men seized from the arsenal was thwarted, however, by local farmers, militiamen, and Marines led by Robert E. Lee. Within 36 hours of the attack, most of Brown’s men had been killed or captured. Despite his contributions to the antislavery cause, Brown did not emerge as a figure of major significance until 1855 after he followed five of his sons to the Kansas territory. There, he became the leader of antislavery guerillas and fought a pro-slavery attack against the antislavery town of Lawrence. The following year, in retribution for another attack, Brown went to a pro-slavery town and brutally killed five of its settlers. Brown and his sons would continue to fight in the territory and in Missouri for the rest of the year. Brown returned to the east and began to think more seriously about his plan for a war in Virginia against slavery. He sought money to fund an “army” he would lead. On October 16, 1859, he set his plan to action when he and 21 other men — 5 blacks and 16 whites — raided the federal arsenal at Harpers Ferry.

Brown was wounded and quickly captured, and moved to Charlestown, Virginia, where he was tried and convicted of treason. 

Before hearing his sentence, Brown was allowed make an address to the court.
… I believe to have interfered as I have done, … in behalf of His despised poor, was not wrong, but right. Now, if it be deemed necessary that I should forfeit my life for the furtherance of the ends of justice, and mingle my blood further with the blood of my children, and with the blood of millions in this slave country whose rights are disregarded by wicked, cruel, and unjust enactments, I submit: so let it be done.”

John Brown was hanged on December 2, 1859.

BROWN AS SEEN THROUGH THE EYES OF HISTORY

Nearly a century and a half after his execution, John Brown remains one of the most fiercely debated and enigmatic figures in American history. 

  • Brown’s earliest biographers—especially James Redpath, Franklin Sanborn, and Oswald Garrison Villard—were hero-worshippers who considered Brown a warrior-saint whose assaults on slavery represented the first crucial steps toward emancipation. 
  • During the 1930s and early 1940s, a more critical view arose. At a time when revisionists regarded the Civil War as a needless conflict fomented by fanatics and blundering politicians, many scholars followed the lead of James C. Malin, who argued that Brown was little more than an indiscriminate murderer, swindler, and petty horse thief, who had little genuine interest in anti-slavery or in the rights of African Americans.
  •  Following World War II, many leading historians dismissed Brown as clinically delusional—Bruce Catton called him “unbalanced to the verge of outright madness”—and denounced his attack on Harpers Ferry as an act of treason. 
  • A notable dissenter was the Marxist historian Herbert Aptheker, who argued that Brown’s rage against slavery grew out of his fury over market capitalism, which had reduced his family to poverty.
  •  In the 1960s a new generation of scholars viewed Brown as an uncompromising idealist, a principled agitator, and a genuine revolutionary who envisioned an America free of racial prejudice. Credit to Steven Mintz-

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/aia/part4/4p1550.html

http://www.gilderlehrman.org/history-by-era/failure-compromise/essays/john-brown-villain-or-hero

The Zanj Rebellion or the Negro Rebellion was the culmination of series of small revolts, that is now known as the biggest slave rebellion of the Arab slave trade. It took place near the city of Basra, located in present-day southern Iraq, over a period of fifteen years (AD 869–883). The insurrection is believed to have involved enslaved Bantus (Zanj) that had originally been captured from the African Great Lakes region and areas further south in East Africa. It grew to involve over 500,000 slaves and free men who were imported from across the Muslim empire and claimed over “tens of thousands of lives in lower Iraq”.The precise composition of the rebels is debated among historians, both as regards their identity and as to the proportion of slaves and free among them – available historical sources being open to various interpretations.

The revolt was said to have been led by Ali bin Muhammad, who claimed to be a descendant of Caliph Ali ibn Abu Talib. Several historians, such as al-Tabari and al-Masudi, consider this revolt one of the “most vicious and brutal uprisings” of the many disturbances that plagued the Abbasid central government.

The Zanj Revolt helped Ahmad ibn Tulun to create an independent state in Egypt. It is only after defeating the Zanj Revolt that the Abbasids were able to turn their attention to Egypt and end the Tulunid dynasty with great destruction.

And among the rebels in prison, who had committed murder in the insurrection, there was a man called Barabbas.
— 

Mark‬ ‭15‬:‭7‬ ESV

The largest Jewish insurrection against Rome was very recent, the consequences of it still being felt in small actions throughout Jesus’ life. (Look up the Jacob and Simon uprising in Galilee, Jesus’ hometown, as an example of how the tensions increased very soon after Jesus). We can see evidence of the culture of revolution and rebellion even in the names of Jesus’ disciples, many of whom were probably named for the most famous revolutionaries that were well known and legendary around the time they were born (Simon, John, Judas, and Matthew). Jesus’ disciple Simon was called a “zealot”, part of the most radical sect of the Jewish resistance.

Jesus was to be crucified, the same sentence Barabbas was given. This was a form of execution given uniquely to insurrectionists against the empire, like Barabbas. By executing Jesus on a cross, he was being accused and condemned of violent rebellion against Rome, during an era of incredible political tension that would erupt into war less than a generation after Jesus’ crucifixion.

Jesus’ teachings, life, and death must be interpreted through the lens of this omnipresent violent and radical environment. It was in the very air that he and his disciples breathed.

Though Peter Salem’s birth year is not certain, he was born a slave in Framingham, MA. His owner, Jeremiah Belknap, named him after his hometown of Salem, MA. In America’s early years, Massachusetts, monitoring an insurrection by Blacks, made it illegal for them to serve in the military. When the need for soldiers increased during the French and Indian Wars, Blacks were pressed into military duty. In mid-1775, the Massachusetts Committee of Safety recruited only free Blacks.

Salem had been sold to Major Lawson Buckminster, who freed him. He became one of the Minutemen heroes of the American Revolutionary War. On April 19, 1775, he fought at Concord, Massachusetts. A week later, he enlisted in Colonel Nixon’s Fifth Massachusetts Regiment. He served in Captain Drury’s company and fought with Drury at the Battle of Bunker Hill. At dawn on June 17, 1775, General William Howe ordered fire on the Americans three times and drove them northward across Bunker Hill. In this battle the Americans had 400 dead and wounded men; the British lost more than 1,000. Salem was credited with the shot that killed British Major John Pitcairn.

Salem re-enlisted in 1776 and fought at Saratoga and Stony Point. At first, General George Washington forbade Blacks from soldiering. After Virginia’s governor, Lord Dunmore, freed slaves to serve the British, Washington reversed his orders, and in January 1776, Salem re-enlisted. After the war, Salem built a cabin near Leicester, MA , and worked as a cane weaver. He died in the Framingham poorhouse in 1816. He is buried at the Old Burying Ground. In 1882, the town of Framingham erected a monument in his honor.

(blackpast.org)

Following the 1992 LA riots, leftist commentators often opted to define the event as a rebellion rather than a riot as a way to highlight the political nature of people’s actions. This attempt to reframe the public discourse is borne of ‘good intentions’ (the desire to combat the conservative media’s portrayal of the riots as ‘pure criminality’), but it also reflects an impulse to contain, consolidate, appropriate, and accommodate events that do not fit political models grounded in white, Euro- American traditions. When the mainstream media portrays social disruptions as apolitical, criminal, and devoid of meaning, Leftists often respond by describing them as politically reasoned. Here, the confluence of political and anti-social tendencies in a riot/ rebellion are neither recognized nor embraced. Certainly some who participated in the London riots were armed with sharp analyses of structural violence and explicitly political messages - the rioters were obviously not politically or demographically homogenous. However, sympathetic radicals tend to privilege the voices of those who are educated and politically astute, rather than listening to those who know viscerally that they are fucked and act without first seeking moral approval. Some Leftists and radicals were reluctant to affirm the purely disruptive perspectives, like those expressed by a woman from Hackney, London who said, ‘We’re not all gathering together for a cause, we’re running down Foot Locker.’ Or the excitement of two girls stopped by the BBC while drinking looted wine. When asked what they were doing, they spoke of the giddy ‘madness’ of it all, the ‘good fun’ they were having, and said that they were showing the police and the rich that ‘we can do what we want.’ Translating riots into morally palatable terms is another manifestation of the appeal to innocence - rioters, looters, criminals, thieves, and disrupters are not proper victims and hence, not legitimate political actors. Morally ennobled victimization has become the necessary precondition for determining which grievances we are willing to acknowledge and authorize.
—  Against Innocence: Race, Gender, and the Politics of Safety
youtube

"If Republicans can forgive people for armed insurrection, desertion and speaking Spanish, a Democrat can forgive us for getting high."

Maher asks the President to pardon all non-violent drug offenders 

In an October 2009 report by South Africa’s intelligence service, the National Intelligence Agency (NIA), on operations in Africa, Israel is said to be “working assiduously to encircle and isolate Sudan from the outside, and to fuel insurrection inside Sudan”. Israel “has long been keen to capitalise on Africa’s mineral wealth”, the South African spying agency says, and “plans to appropriate African diamonds and process them in Israel, which is already the world’s second largest processor of diamonds”.

The document reports that members of a delegation led by then foreign minister Avigdor Lieberman had been “facilitating contracts for Israelis to train various militias” in Africa.

The NIA’s relationship with its highly active Israeli counterpart, Mossad, has been mixed: close during the apartheid era, distant in the early years of the rule of the pro-Palestinian African National Congress, and more ambiguous in recent years.

One factor in South Africa’s attraction for rival spy agencies is the porous nature of its security services. A South African intelligence document, Security Vulnerabilities in Government, dated October 2009, offers an uncompromising look at the weakness of its security, a point rammed home by the fact it is marked secret but ended up among the leaked files.

The document says: “Foreign governments and their intelligence services strive to weaken the state and undermine South Africa’s sovereignty. Continuing lack of an acceptable standard of security … increases the risk.” It lists theft of laptop computers, insufficient lock-up facilities, limited vetting of senior officials in sensitive institutions, no approved encryption on landlines or mobiles, total disregard by foreign diplomats for existing regulations, ease of access to government departments allowed to foreign diplomats, and the lack of proper screening for foreigners applying for sensitive jobs.

According to one intelligence officer with extensive experience in South Africa, the NIA is politically factionalised and “totally penetrated” by foreign agencies: “Everyone is working for someone else.” The former head of the South African secret service, Mo Shaik, a close ally of the president, Jacob Zuma, was described as a US confidant and key source of information on “the Zuma camp” in a leaked 2008 Wikileaks cable from the American embassy in Pretoria.


mo shaik once bombed a south african ministry building and now he’s an american stooge. great how these things work.

7

Deanna Fashion Project Top 10

8. Insurrection  (Insurrection)

Remember when I said I love Deanna in kick-ass leathers? Here is an excellent example. It’s a great example of how these characters are costumed in general. We’ve got Worf still wearing a sash, and a general Klingon aesthetic, despite being in randoplanet-townsperson clothes. Beverly is wearing a blue jacket over blue. And Data is dressed like a nerdy Pinocchio. Deanna stands out from them with no blue, but a (kick ass) leather jacket. I wants that jacket! 

Deanna’s clothes say “don’t mess with me!” — look at the way she’s in charge of the situation marching down to Picard in that second image! — but don’t get in the way of keeping her ridiculously adorable as in that last screencap.