Breaking with Consensus Reality
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
BREAKING WITH The task of the revolutionary is not simply to fulfill existing desires, but to expand our collective sense of the possible, so our desires and CONSENSUS REALITY the realities they drive us to create can shift in turn. If we want to end oppression, not merely manage its details in a non-coercive manner, from the politics of consent to the seduction of revolution a discourse of consent is not enough. We need a new framework to open pathways out of consensus reality. We aspire to invite others into practices that will prove contagious: ideas that self-replicate, models that can be applied in a variety of circumstances, attitudes that prove infectious. We succeed when others emerge from the spaces we create feeling more powerful. We win when the ruptures of possibility we open prove impossible to close. For further reading on related subjects, check out: THE DIVORCE OF THOUGHT FROM DEED: SOCIAL CONFLICT, WHITE SUPREMACY, AND FREE SPEECH AT UNC CHAPEL HILL by the NC Piece Corps THE ILLEGITIMACY OF VIOLENCE, THE VIOLENCE OF LEGITIMACY by Crimethinc GOD ONLY KNOWS WHAT DEVILS WE ARE by the Institute for Experimental Freedom A PLEA FOR CAPTAIN JOHN BROWN by Henry David Thoreau The following is an excerpt from TERROR INCOGNITA, available from CrimethInc: www.crimethinc.com to contact the authors: [email protected] | Laid out in haste by the NC Piece Corps consent | seduction | violence 1 desires to arise or flow into new hosts. Critics who frame their objections in consent discourse may not be fundamentally opposed to the tactics in question BREAKING WITH after all; they may simply not feel that they had the chance to become protagonists in their own stories CONSENSUS REALITY of rebellion. from the politics of consent to the seduction of revolution INTO THE UNKNOWN What are anarchists good for? We don’t see ourselves as “the” revolutionary subject, nor its vanguard or representative. But that doesn’t mean we’re irrelevant to the struggles and upheavals around us. We up the ante and rep the anti; we call bluffs and take dares; Those of us who wish to create a freer world face a either. Furthermore, since we can only desire on the we discover lines of flight out of consensus reality. fundamental contradiction. On one hand, we don’t basis of what we know, we’re unlikely to achieve lib- We take risks to induce others to share them with us; want to impose our will on others, which runs coun- eration from simply fulfilling the desires we have we take care of each other so we can be dangerous ter to our values. On the other hand, many of the now without changing the conditions that produced together. strategies and tactics that can help us respond to op- them. So how else might we conceive of our political Ultimately, the politics of seduction don’t pression and injustice are unpalatable to the majority project, if not through the lens of consent? rely on rational argumentation to influence people. of our fellow citizens. The impoverishment of mil- A close examination of our activities reveals We dive headlong into the terrifying fires of trans- lions and the destruction of our ecosystems demand that in setting out to transform our society, we ap- formation, allowing strange passions to seize us. It’s that we act decisively. What standards will enable us pear to be operating according to a logic of seduction. not that these desires are “ours”; rather, we are theirs. to challenge these systems of misery without resort- Are we prepared to accept the implications of this We become lightning rods that crackle with flows of ing to the authoritarian means we condemn? reframing? Let’s begin by examining the politics of charged desire. Some of us have developed a practice of consent and their limitations. Let’s not forget the importance of seduc- prioritizing consent as a provisional answer to this ing ourselves with our actions. It’s frighteningly easy dilemma. This discourse comes to us through edu- for activism to ossify into dreary, repetitive routines. cators who promote mutually respectful sexuality in IS CONSENT Actions that don’t emerge out of our own desires are the midst of a rape culture. Applying this discourse unlikely to seduce us or anyone else. Sure, some kids within our intimate relationships and beyond, we ENOUGH? will be radicalized by the Food Not Bombs run by seek to respect others’ autonomy by not subjecting four burnt-out punks who resent every Sunday they them to actions that violate their consent—that is, At first glance, the notion of basing our politi- spend in the kitchen. But we forge our deepest rela- by staying within the boundaries of others’ desires as cal practice on a theory of consent makes intuitive tionships of struggle in collectively experiencing the they determine and articulate them. We reject coer- sense. What’s our critique of the state? It’s a body new, the exciting, the terrifying. It’s not only beauti- cion of any form, whether physical, verbal, econom- that wields power over us even to the point of life ful but strategic to live lives that push to the outer- ic, or otherwise, and assert our self-determination to and death, and yet no one ever asked us if we wanted most edges of what’s possible. participate in or abstain from whatever we choose. to be governed. Elections don’t even begin to offer The stakes are high. From consent dis- Yet outside of the sexual realm, consent us the meaningful alternatives true consent would course, we retain the prioritization of caring for oth- discourse doesn’t always offer a sufficient framework require. It’s been said before: our desires will never ers and paying attention to their needs. We must with which to evaluate direct action tactics and fit in their ballot boxes. We promote the principle of never disregard the well-being of those we invite into strategy. Knowing whether an action is consensual voluntary association—the freedom to form what- zones of transformation; yet neither can we play it may not suffice to indicate whether it is effective or ever groups and collectives we want without being safe and allow consensus reality to dictate our range worthwhile. Aware that most people oppose some of compelled to participate in any. We never had the of possible dreams and actions. We cannot promise our tactics, we don’t plan our actions on the basis of chance to say no to capitalism, to government, to safety, but we can share in the danger of the un- consent, yet we don’t aspire to become a vanguard, police, to all the systems of hierarchy that impose known, in its pleasures and its risks. 2 consent | seduction | violence consent | seduction | violence 11 gion ensures that rebellion isn’t restricted to activists, their rule—so clearly those can’t be consensual in any thought and action within a system of power rela- live. Sometimes it can be as simple as doing things in scenesters, or any other particular group. Only when meaningful way. As we do away with the coercive tions. It is enforced not only through traditional in- the street without permits, or using a park or build- revolt spreads so widely that it can no longer be systems that dominate our lives, we can reconstruct stitutions of control—such as mass media, religion, ing for an entirely new purpose. Disobedience is cru- quarantined to a specific demographic will anarchy new social relations based on consent: a world in and the family—but also through the innumerable cial to transformation; nothing opens up a sense of move permanently beyond the anarchists. We suc- which no one controls anyone else, in which we can subtle norms manifested in common sense, civil possibility like literally breaking the rules. But our ceed when others emerge from the spaces we create determine our own destinies. discourse, and day-to-day life. It isn’t simply the ag- behavior is constrained by far more than traffic laws feeling more powerful. We win when the ruptures of It makes sense… doesn’t it? Certainly, this gregate of all our desires, melded together in a great and zoning regulations; social norms, gender roles, possibility we open prove impossible to close. discourse of consent offers a compelling way to im- compromise that allows us all to get along, as demo- and innumerable other systems shape how we act, agine the world we want to live in. But how does it cratic mythology would have it. Consensus reality and each way we’re constrained provides new terrain serve as a strategy for dislodging this one? It’s dif- constitutes the ruling class’s coordinated attempt to for transformation. The key lies in challenging what’s ficult to envision a political practice that stringently uphold their dominance and our exploitation as effi- taken for granted in a way that opens up the possibil- WHEN SEDUCTION FAILS respects the consent of all people while simultane- ciently as possible. Capitalist democracy secures that ity to act differently, and to imagine how the world ously destroying the fabric of our hierarchical soci- efficiency; it is the system that currently provides the would be different if those rules and borders were no Unfortunately, our actions don’t always achieve these ety. If we insist on the unity of means and ends, we largest number of people with incentive to partici- longer fixed. goals. Sometimes we try to cast spells of transforma- have to dismantle coercive institutions and social re- pate in their own exploitation.