Anarchy: a journal of desire armed. #36, Spring 1993
      anticopyright - Anarchy may be reprinted at will for 
      non-profit purposes, except in the case of individual 
      copyrighted contributions.

LETTERS
-includes part one of three

@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
               _Have_something_to_say?__Write_us!_

 We would like to encourage you to write us in order to continue
this dialogue, whether you are sympathetic or critical of anarchist
theories and practices. All letters will be printed with the auth-
or's initials only, unless it is specifically stated that her/his
full name may be used or that s/he wishes to remain anonymous, or
the name already appears in Anarchy - as in the case of an author
of an essay or creator of artwork published here.

 We will edit letters that are redundant, overly long, unreadable
or excessively boring. (Ellipses in italicized brackets [...]
indicate editorial omissions.) Limit length to four double-spaced,
typewritten pages. Address your letters to C.A.L., POB 1446,
Columbia, MO. 65205-1446. We look forward to hearing from you!

Keep us posted
Dear Compa¤eros/as:

 Thank you for sending me the Summer '92 issue of Anarchy. I
gleaned so much from it that now I'm wondering what I've missed out
on in your back issues [...] I am also interested in reading some
of the original writings of Proudhon, Kropotkin, Bakunin, and
Ricardo Flores Mag¢n. I have already read the few watered down
books available from the Tucson Library through an outside prison
library service, however, TCN ibrary doesn't have any of the
original writings that I seek, and it seems that TCN Library has
never heard of Proudhon or Kropotkin. Any material sent to me
(paperback and not more than 6 of anything) will be perused by many
more than myself.

 Also, keep us posted on Os Cangaceiros. Perhaps, an article giving
your readers a historical picture of this kind of activity, where
the citizens of the world in their respective geographical areas
have taken it upon themselves to sabotage or to bring down the
walls, will inspire la gente to a new pastime.

 Well my friends, I have Rudolf Rocker here in my cell explaining
to me his Nacionalismo y Cultura. It's sad how some of us have
wasted so much time and blood fighting amongst ourselves for the
impoverished streets of our barrios, ghettos and gangs that don't
even belong to us. But, as it recently became obvious to the world
in May, the pain soaked walls and the land steeped with blood and
sweat are very fertile; fertile with the seeds of tomorrow! Water
them; water them with the past, the now, the future. Yet be aware
that they, the wild seeds, will sprout and grow with or without
you. The land is so rich, freedom is so intangible, pain and
frustration are so felt, why then such passiveness?
                                                 Sigamos luchando
                                                  y apprendiendo,
                                             Jaime Enrique Baxter
                                                #88410-012 F.C.I.
                                               8901 S. Wilmot Rd.
                                                Tucson, AZ. 85706

State-produced dust
Dear @ friends,

 I have just moved into a dorm at college - I'm a freshman here.
Brought my collection of Anarchy mags and believe me, I have
thoroughly read and re-read them. This is a Methodist college full
of mindless assholes. My roommate "didn't get" a short fiction
story I wrote for a friend about the day our gov't starts charging
money for people to breathe air. He told me it was `unrealistic',
and when I asked him what he thought about paying for food (another
necessity of life) he told me that was `different'.

 Anyway, I love your mag. I was an anarchist in 8th grade due to
my dissatisfaction w/ school, but after I was thoroughly put down
by my relatives and busted for my beliefs (making explosives from
science-room chemicals I stole) I was brainwashed by a shrink and
almost caught shoplifting. I decided to lay low, and my mind
collected state-produced dust.

 I'm currently trying to kick tobacco addiction and trying to prove
that Ritalin really doesn't work. I was on it for 2 school
quarters, then stopped for a quarter and my grades went up, not
that grades matters. I also felt better physically. Anyway, kids -
doctors can be drug pushers too. "Learning stimulants" are just
speed. They fuck up your metabolism, buzz you up, and eventually
can drive you to depression (as they did me).

 Well, enough I think. Will subscribe as soon as I got bloody
money.

 Pissed Peoples of the Planet Unite!
                                     A.D. (no address by request)

Looking
Dear Anarchy,

 I have received #33/Summer '92. I have paid what I could afford
for it, $2.00, and you were kind enough to send it to me. I am a
Wisconsin prisoner. I got your address from ApaEros which belonged
to a friend. This capitalistic system holds me back. I am in the
hole (seg) and shall be till at least 1993 (July). I am requesting
the free prisoner subscription you advertise. I would continue to
pay but they have taken all my money for so-called `restitution'.
I also request that you trade my address with any other papers or
projects especially sexually-oriented papers, mags, projects, etc.
My release date is August 25, 1995... Also I was wondering if you
could like publish my address in your mag so someone writes to me.
I am a 19 year old male who loves women! Of all shapes, sizes, and
colors!...I am looking for females to write, also please add I
request photographs. Well, thank you, komrades!
                                              Anarchy in the U.S.
                                                   Amerika Awake!
                                       Jayson J. Strieter #186727
                                      Greenbay Correctional Inst.
                                        Green Bay, WI. 54307-9033

Pen friends wanted
My dear friend,

 I very much want to have pen friends in your country. Please help
me, if you may. I will be very glad if I will have friends in your
country in the future.. I'm a citizen of the Ukraine. My name is
Sergei. I'm Ukrainian. I was born on 25th October 1963 year. Now I
live in the village of Novonikolaevka. My hobbies -  photo,
tourism, music, travel by car, collection of foreign banknotes,
stamps, postcards, magazines, discs, etc. I know English, Ukrainian
and Russian. I send answers to all peoples, who wanted to have pen
friends with me. Please help me.
                                                 Yours sincerely,
                                                  Sergei Naydonov
                                              28, Ostrovskogo St.
                                              vil. Novonikolaevka
                                              Melitopolskij Rajon
                                                Zaporozhskayaobl.
                                                   332375 Ukraina

Remembering
Bob Brubaker
Cherubic cheeks
sweet smile across his small
 mouth
clear eyes
full-chested hugs

 Bob's fatal asthma condition is something I don't remember him
discussing much with me during the short time he lived in San
Francisco. Running together in Golden Gate Park, I remember Bob
always looking fit; from Japan he wrote of his pleasure running
regularly. He also hiked up Mt. Fuji where he was struck by the
myriad of lights from other hikers' lanterns. Bob's words painted
a picture reminiscent of a scenen by the Japanese 19th century
artists Hiroshige and Hokusai.

 Bob grappled with his writing, which he felt was inadequate. This
self-criticism followed him from Detroit, where he worked on the
Fifth Estate to Japan, where he continued to read and write,
nevertheless. Bob loved to write letters full of lucid descrip-
tions, critiques, reviews. These could easily have been compiled to
create publishable pieces, but he wasn't easily convinced of this.

 Some of Bob's friends in the U.S. didn't understand or accept his
living in Japan. I believe he was nurtured by his exile from the
frustrations of living in the U.S., including the problem of trying
to exist in more of a political vacuum than any of us had
experienced in the late '60s or early '70s. In 1986 he wrote from
Japan:

 "It is a fascinating place. It is, of course, very industrialized,
very modern and people are very middle class (consumer oriented) in
their interests, so the exoticism that some foreigners are looking
for is largely absent. But it's sufficiently different from the
U.S. to be continually intriguing (in my opinion), and I've found
people to be very friendly and kind. I've been invited into peo-
ple's homes, and have quite a few good friends here. There are
frustrations and difficulties, too, and not all Japanese people are
kindly disposed toward foreigners. Overall, my experience in Japan
(and Heidi's, too) has been very positive."

 When Bob thought of returning, he considered Eugene because of the
ease of living without a car, as well as the opportunity to work
with John Zerzan and others. Recently he had considered moving to
Columbia, Missouri to work on Anarchy. But he kept going back to
Japan after his visits to the U.S. And he kept staying, even
through break-ups with lovers.

 I will remember Bob as a warm friend, as a person who stood firm
against this deadly system, and especially as someone who took
pleasure in resistance. When Bob recounted his antics against
authorities, he'd get this impish grin. As I live in the wake of
Bob's death, I hope his rebellious spirit will continue to kindle
my own.
                                                       Melen Lunn
                                               San Francisco, CA.

The family war of
child abuse & neglect
Dear Anarchy,

 Yes! I totally agree with & dig the Positive Evidence for adult-
child sex, tho i don't do it. You are courageous to print it, as is
Featherstone for writing it in dangerous times. He balances his
advocating freedom-of-choice & mutual consent while admitting vast
child sexual abuses are happenin'. But still now these are both
secret, because of antisexual laws & order/the walls-of-fear
blaming-the-victims of hate.

 Now lets get deeper into child-abuses causes & effects of threats
& internalized-taboos in most-civilized-people. In industrial-
nations most all babies are neglected (except the wholistic
families) of great needs for affection, touching & play within
nature from birth on. This has created our public-schools &
violent-sports because we missed the natural homebirth & bonding
(need) period lasting our first 1-3 years or more in the-family-
bed. So us hospital-born-babies with drugs (early start) by
repressed adults customs of normal separations of: nursery bed,
crib, carriage, hi-chair, car-seat & play-pens keep us apart from
nature & intimate touching. These all make us fussy, mad, needy-
suckers, crying for love. "Oh no! Martha, give'm a bottle,
pacifier, a toy or sweet," (tit-sub) fix-fast to-shut 'em-up mom,
say tense relatives.

 During 21 yrs of daily-soul-research starting with Primal
screaming (therapy) alone for 2 weeks to release buried fear &
pain, & regressing 100s of times since; my awareness of the causes
& effects of birth, emotions & our energy changes keeps growing
here. I'm still meeting my parents & children who had /have more
bonding than older generations. But parents still have hidden-
abuses that twist into projections of fear, trusting-illusions &
getting sick without knowing why or how to prevent it naturally. So
our forgotten birth-trauma, child-abuse & neglect make us lame,
fear nature & in-conflicts stemming from the family-war we excuse
with a ton of good-memories, hateful-blame & depending on doctors
to know our body better than we do how to balance it all. These
Primal (energy) causes of love & problems are mostly denied now
because:

 1. Memory block-Most adults were abused & neglected, but
don't/can't recall it, doubting it's even possible to remember
birth.

 2. Child-abuse-is usually hidden in private rooms in homes (incest
at nite) & hospitals of nice & clean (nazi) business, since the
peace movement stopped public beatings for good.

 3. Legal-systems-usually protect abusing-adults by denying
legal/civil-rights of due-process of law to abused children.

 4. The true causes of crime-are blamed by `experts' onto poverty,
genes, frustration, drugs, racism (not pain & need).

 5. Medical health-(lab) science does (must) deny all causing of
birth-trauma & illness, to sell its hi-tech treatments, of numbing
therapy (insured for the rich) trusting experts knowing our bodies
mechanically, but denying nature's power.

 6. Deep fears-of emotions, freelove, guilt-for-abuse, pain,
child's-innocence & raw-nature keep us indoors for safety, and
rationalized, like parents punishing children, "for their own
good!" (see Alice Miller's books on this).

 7. 100,000s of us into radical-therapy-& Nature-spirit are finding
memories of childhood abuse & neglect (even birth), naturally-
healing it by regressing, breathing & emoting, & becoming more
sensitive, instinctual & creative lovinglife, while also feeling
the shit of growing-up. The subconscious unwinds the energy-blocks
we had to be clean, nice & good.

 So it's no wonder that the libertarians & anarchists don't seek
or know the deep causes of normal-massive: fear & hate, body-
stress, suicides, illness, drug-dependence/wars, cops & robbers,
pollution & destruction or nature, burying us in shit. So most
adults waddle or jog (& sleep) thru life or consuming, secretly
carrying years of pain & fear from being threatened, punished &
abused in childhood, pretending they're OK, better, best or bad.
The consensus-of-denial=the illusion-of-state-democracy now. So we
must evolve out natural-systems at home.

 Some great sources for understanding this are R.D. Laing's books
on mental health: The Politics of the Family & Sanity, Madness &
the Family that explain the causes of insanity are at home blaming-
the-victim of (parents'-problems) abuse & neglect for seeking-
freedom, (breaking rules), equality (respect), touching & access to
nature-spaces, locked indoors.

 The legal-games cover-this-up with the age-of-consent laws,
ageism/seniority, punishment (abusing) to train all youth to obey,
consume & depend on big-adults to supply essentials is really hip-
market-distractions from Nature, abuse pain & freedom, & need to
scream about the hate, fear & pollution. Hawaii just passed a law
allowing & justifying more "Use of force" & punishment to control-
youth in the same category with incompetents, prisoners & mental-
patients. So kids are like animals to dominate & punish, except by
extreme damage. So reversing this trend of more control & less
respect for children's civil-rights is greatly needed for a
peaceful community of family love. Punishment-creates-violence &
fearful people; while natural pleasure & cooperation come from
affection, nature & freedom of self-regulation. It appears that
most-sexual-problems are caused by fear & rules against intimacy
from-birth-on, when bonding & nursing are needed! Kids-sex becomes
stress/needs if exploring is forbidden, like parents hiding-their-
sex from us children. If we missed nursing & bonding, the damage
can be healed.

 For me rebonding with a nursing-loving mother in the family-bed
when I was 40 years old, with Rebirthing was healing like lovenergy
can be anywhere it's felt-all-over is ecstasy. This revolution is
the absolute-freedom of natural-homeducation.

 So I'm starting the LCPCA: Local Center for Prevention of Child-
Abuse & neglect naturally now to learn, heal & create love instead
of the compulsory stresses of competitive life. Perhaps like
Sweden, our most aware states can pass non-punishing laws
forbidding child-abuse & promoting all natural & cooperative
solutions to training children in life. Giving children: respect,
choices & civil-rights will solve most of the problems we have in
family & education wars now.
                                                   Mycall Sunanda
                                                           LCPCA,
                                                           POB 28
                                               Naalehu, HI. 96772

Anarchism is naturalism
Anarchy friends,

 What is Anarchism but naturalism!

 Naturalism, I'd put it, is that which precedes this 6000-year
civilization we're all enmeshed in. What precedes it is the 2-
million-year prehistory. But early prehistory, or dawn days, the
pre-hunting & fruitarian era. The later prehistory sees, at least
on the part of the male, the hunting & killing of other species.
Hunting, meateating, isn't quite natural. We by-nature are not
carnivorous. Not our teeth, not our jaws, not our essential human
disposition. We happen to be frugivorous. (Even vegetarianism is a
later-prehistory phenomenon.)

 Prehistory precedes that formal, impersonal, artificial structure
known as government, or the state. Prehistory likewise precedes
that which is hooked to the state, to wit, class. An economic
elite. Private Property. As of the emergence of agriculture and
domestication of animals. Along with domestication of women &
children.

 So the deeper into prehistory, the more naturalism - and Anar-
chism. Having said all that, I'd like citing one more bit of pre-
history - and naturalism - the relationship of the sexes. We today,
we of 6000-year civilization, take for granted the male chasing the
female, the male showing the initiative. Yet in prehistory, more
emphatically dawn days, it's the reverse! At that time is the
female chasing the male... when, that is, she's in heat! And when
she is, she looks like what today's sexually aggressive male looks
like.

 We sometimes say just that "He chases her till she catches him."
This jest should offer a hint of what once-upon-a-prehistoric-time
really had been! Ancestral memory!

 Today is the female still attracted to the male, still this
naturalness. Except that she, `thanks' to the civilizational,
Victorian & new-Victorian conditioning, has to suppress this show
of attraction, or even the feeling of attraction, at least until
marriage or mating. She then, not surprisingly, sometimes (maybe
more than sometimes) becomes a "bedroom commando," if but from her
nature-given capacity at orgasm at many-many times that of the
male. The male, meanwhile - astonishing even to himself - finds
himself in the role of the sexual passivity!

 Yet those latter roles are the natural roles, the dawn-time roles.

 So should we all go back to dawn-time? Why not! Except we retain
our technology (like a beaver retaining its dam), but a technology
no longer hooked to the capitalism or statism.

 Males, thus - to be more natural about matters - ought quit
chasing the females, ought rather stay put and let the females do
the chasing (about the way Ms. George Sand was doing toward
Chopin). Of course most today's females won't do the chasing, what
with the 6000-year conditioned passivity. So the males might have
a long-long wait before being courted.

 So it's a problem! How have or bring back natural sexual
relationships! But the real problem is civilization itself, or more
accurately the kind of civilization - the statism, the classism,
the strict monogamism, and the 6000-year taboo on that which dawn
folk had no problem with  - free love.
                                               S.C., Detroit, MI.

Pedotopia
Editors,

 Re: J. Featherstone's article, "Positive Child-Adult Sex: The
Evidence," & related letters [see Anarchy #33/Summer '92 p.60].
Even if the anecdotes in the article were more widely known, they
wouldn't make his `case' for him. Why did the children initiate
these contacts? "Wanting to make a man happy" is considerably more
sophisticated than infantile sexplay, & one wants to know not only
where a 7-year-old learns the desire, but just how fellatio &
happiness are related in her mind. Are these anecdotes to suggest
that more children (of what social class? of what temperament?)
would want sex with adults if taboos did not exist?

 Few of the children could continue their relationships; traumas
followed discovery; even barring discovery, & given pleasure &
affection, what if the adult dies? or contracts HIV? or faces some
other disaster? Do children have the emotional strength & the
support of friends & family to cope with these matters?

 `Consent' needs re-thinking. It involves more than acquiescence
or pursuit: one who consents, as the word implies, has the same
feel for the whole of an issue in common with another. In the best
case, adults solicit the consent of children by teaching them what
the whole involves, securing, not token expressions (specific to
the issue) of a pre-existent, well-developed feel for the whole of
life, but rather the terms according to which that capacity is
extended or transformed. A parent, teacher, or guardian has a feel
for the whole of a child's capacities, interests, history,
temperament & so on - worlds away from bourgeois conventions of
seduction (gifts, games, fun), which recognize no individuality.

 If children, like women, have been oppressed in their desires,
then children will have to re-imagine themselves as women have
done, transforming consent, erotic or romantic relationships, self-
consciousness, & community. Wouldn't that child begin to be free
who could not only desire stimulation or coitus (with adults or
other children), but appreciate the spectrum of erotic & romantic
relationships as social & historical fields of imaginative play &
spiritual evolution, fantasize about ideal & possible partners,
assessing family members, friends, teachers, acquaintances,
consider & discuss initiating relationships, turning to friends,
parents, mentors, or even books to clarify feelings & ideas, &
express dissatisfaction & end relationships?

 C.D. of Somerville says he isn't afraid to look anyone in the eye
& say he loves boys. So what? Does that help a child discover the
possibilities & responsibilities of "fully armed" desire? He & Mr.
Featherstone think people won't consider the idea of child-adult
sex (a more accurate term than the barbarous "intergenerational
consensual sex," which could just as well apply to Harold & Maude),
but there is no such `idea' outside of social & historical reality.

 Pointing to ancient Greece or other archaic societies in which the
sexual initiation of children is integrated into the political,
philosophical, or spiritual feeling a people has for itself will do
no good - if community is to include sexual relationships between
children, adolescents, & adults that have positive psychological,
social, economic, philosophical, political or spiritual
significance, society will have to be re-invented.

 Unless pedophiles make babies & rear them in pedotopia, they will
always be dealing with other people's children: that means kinship
structures, education, money & social relations are involved. The
`morality' of those relations is no more in question than a
pedophile's resentment of prejudice - only the work of imagination
& the actual effects of newly imagined relationships in society.

 What, for instance, are the possibilities of adults serving as
sexual mentors to adolescents who risk pregnancy & disease? How
could adults who desire adolescents keep them away from predators
who are looking for `clean' prostitutes? Are other radical &
healthy options possible?

 There is a moving French film, Sundays & Cybele, about a 30-ish
amnesiac & a 12-year-old orphan girl who fall in love. She has
conventional ideas (when she's 18 they'll marry), but, hiding her
real name, clearly conscious of her power & her feelings,
negotiates her childlikeness & growing womanhood with great charm.
The muted eroticism of their friendship makes the tragic end a
symbol of fear  - but alerts us to responses, thoughts, hopes,
desires, for this couple, that could be the beginning of a work of
informed hearts. (Ditto for another French film, L'Adolescente.) Or
we could recall how, in 1794, the 22-year-old German poet &
philosopher Novalis spent 15 minutes with 12-year old Sophie &
conceived a passion for her that changed his life; among the
community of people who commented on the betrothal, even Goethe
thought the girl remarkable. Aren't there other stories that
exemplify neither pederasty nor pedophilia, but show adults who
experience the love of a child as a personal revelation?

 On the strength of these stories & of my questions, I feel Mr.
Featherstone has an enormous amount of work to do before he can
address the question of pederasty and pedophilia as being possible
fields of liberation, not only because the names themselves speak
only of the desire for children, but not he desire of children, but
because he is willing to cast people in general as narrow-minded
villains, when they are guilty of what most members of the status
quo are guilty of: a lack of imagination. It is unforgivable that
a person who wants to espouse a revolutionary cause is unable to
understand this.
                                                     Omar Bozeman
                                              28 Quint Avenue #15
                                               Allston, MA. 02134

Cuba is not leftist
Anarchy,

 I'm responding to the OGB News Service's article "`Peace for
Cuba': The Repressive Left in Action," printed in your Summer, 1992
issue.

 Communism in the Soviet Union was totalitarian, and communism in
modern Cuba is fascism. Both political ideologies are right-winged,
or radically conservative, the latter much more than the former.

 In the former Soviet Union, wasn't all political power, including
decisions involving the means of production, invested in its
government? If the Soviet Union had truly been communist, wouldn't
the opposite have been true?

 In Cuba, all political power is invested in a dictator, Fidel
Castro. All dictatorships are fascist, are they not? Is free and
independent thought permitted in Cuba? Were I Cuban, could I
publicly criticize the government without being arrested or even
killed?

 According to the author(s), "What she (Ms. Avila, a WBAI radio
producer) found (in Cuba) was a system held in place by political
repression and government informers, repressing not just gays....,
but also those who had attempted to work within the system to
create a socialism where freedom of speech and criticism of
bureaucratic mismanagement and elitism were not a crime."

 "She saw numerous cases of repression," including "a Marxist
scholar who was imprisoned for writing a criticism of elitism in
the upper echelons of the Communist Party." These passages
certainly answer my questions.

 This is reminiscent of Nazi Germany. Since Nazi Germany is
referred to as fascist and radically right-winged, why isn't Cuba?

 It irritates me whenever countries like Cuba are referred to as
leftist (I only used the Soviet Union as a further example of what
I consider "The Communist Misconception"). The left is liberal, the
right is conservative. I always considered references to modern
communism as left-winged or leftist a fallacy. Theoretical or pure
communism (which has never existed) is left-winged, but modern
communism is not.
                                                 Sincerely yours,
                                                    John Galliers
                                               Boynton Beach, FL.

Alberto Franceschini has no credibility
Dear comrades of Anarchy,

 We cannot get out of sending you this letter, after we have read
in issue #32 [Spring '92] an interview with Alberto Franceschini,
which previously appeared - as you said - in the French journal Le
Brise-Glace.

 We don't know if you are aware of who this person is and what his
role has been inside the Italian revolutionary movement.

 Otherwise, you must know that:

-he is an ex-leader of the Red Brigades (and this is well-known);

-he denied his organization, armed struggle (in the wide sense of
the term), and the revolutionary movement a long time ago;

-in order to get personal benefits (as his release from prison, as
it's occurred - many of his former comrades, who also denied armed
struggle, did not get the same benefits, evidently because there
was not much they could offer to the justice system) he
collaborated with judges and various prelates. And he had the nerve
to despise the collaborators, look who's talking!

-he pointed out the hiding-places of weapons and munitions to the
authorities;

-when he was a prisoner, the State sent him along to various
Italian special prisons in order to persuade other political pris-
oners to imitate him, to surrender weapons (often they kicked him
out!).

 These are some of his dirty tricks that are public knowledge, so
you can imagine the hidden rest. After these preliminaries, we
would say that we don't mean to judge the choices made a long time
ago by many ex-revolutionaries, withdrawing from the fight and
criticizing their own former political activities; everybody is
master of his own existence - yes, but of his own existence.

 When this "self-criticism" is addressed to the judges, in order
to get some benefits, or, and it's worse, when one tries to involve
all the movement in his own giving up - making up alibis and a new
life, useful especially when one is set free - this is an oppor-
tunist and rotten attitude that we can't accept and justify. The
aim of these hired people is to represent the new political rank,
between prisoners before then and in the movement, and they are
hired by power in order to point out the potential revolutionary
focus. In this way they help power to prevent and repress potential
uprisings.

 We don't understand how it is that the opportunist criticism of
dictatorial organizations made by Franceschini & co. are of inter-
est to anarchists.

 Innumerable anarchist writings have been made about "fighting
parties," in Italy and elsewhere. These writings criticized all the
"fighting parties," that always choke off the anarchist side of the
movement, hampering its propagation. And this happens not because
these organizations are `fighting', but because they are `parties':
i.e. dictatorial, specialist, completely cut off from the rest of
society - whatever Mr. Franceschini may say about it.

 We don't want to enter upon the interview because we don't want
to give credibility to such a person, even if we think what he says
in the interview is doubtful, without considering his `remem-
brances' with police informer effects.

 If one wants to do an analysis of that period or to criticize a
kind of organization, please don't resort to such people whose only
aim is to gain the necessary credibility in order to re-enter the
real revolutionary movement through the window, after they were
thrown out of the door a long time ago - and maybe, by the way,
plugging the last book written!

 We as anarchists, though with strong and still continuing criti-
cisms of the political organizations like the Red Brigades, keep on
appreciating the dignified silence of the fighting militants who
did not sell themselves to the enemy. And that is without
considering all the prisoners, who weren't members of any
dictatorial organization, that are still in prison.

 Many pages have been written about this matter, and many others
might be written. We hope that these pages would not be written by
ex-revolutionaries and betrayers.

 For now, we point out that an anarchist journal, or any other
revolutionary journal, can't so lightly help to give credibility to
surrender, whatever may be the reasons to do it.

 It's very important to think about the damages that doing so
causes to the struggle and to us.

 Hoping that our bad English doesn't cause incomprehension, we send
you our anarchist regards.
                                       M.S. & S.M., Milano, Italy

A masculinist response
to "A Feminist"
Dear C.A.L.,

 I preferred your new Summer '92 format to the old format. Your
magazine is a great source of enlightenment.

 The letter from "A Feminist" annoyed me. Like many feminists, she
seeks to blame white males for her unhappiness. This view divides
men against women.

 Her chief complaints are that women are underpaid and that
pornography is the theory of rape.

 Women are underpaid because they will accept lower wages. When
women flooded the job market, the supply of laborers grew faster
than the demand for labor. That caused the price of labor to go
down.

 Men have to support families. Even today, they are the primary
bread winners. They won't work for a wage they can't live on. Their
wives, however, will work eighty hours a week to earn enough money
for a new car or some other frivolity. Therefore, statistically,
women earn less than men. It's not a patriarchal conspiracy. It's
simple economics. A Feminist needs to blame her materialistic
sisters who put their kids in day care to keep up with the Joneses.

 Her second point about pornography is equally invalid. Men just
like to have pretty pictures of women to look at while they
masturbate. I know. I'm a man, she's not. Anti-pornography laws are
just the precedent needed to suppress other publications, like
Anarchy magazine.
                                                       Sincerely,
                                      A Masculinist, Raleigh, NC.

New Art Riot
Anarchy,

 Hello? Is everyone out there listening to The Manic Street
Preachers yet? Please print this & please tell your readers to
start with New Art Riot. Everything else is just brain dead.
                                                            Love,
                                            A Terrorist, NYC, NY.

Talking to men
Dear Anarchy,

 This is more of a short - after reading Feral Faun's response
(Fall '92) - than a letter. Look mate: I can't vouch for other
women, but this is what I want  - tell me my mind is beautiful, woo
me with poetry, learn how to seduce, wear eyeshadow. I am talking
to men out there - if you wanna get the girl, celebrate her ability
to think.
                                                       Sincerely,
                                   Slashing for Dignity, NYC, NY.

Huffy about porn
 In your Summer '92 issue of Anarchy some person got all huffy
about pornography [see p.70, "Porn is the theory..."]. While i
myself look at the track record of porn with a critical eye; i am
able also to understand that pornography is only a method of
communication or/and art.

 By the examples i have been allowed to see, i've noted what looks
like exploitation, and what strikes my conditioning as negative. At
the same time, upon 1st and 2nd hand experience, i've seen what the
need to make a profit does to communication and/or art. But porn in
and of itself has no mind, it is only a tool, like a gun or water.
Only another force can wield it to do harm.

 Significant questions should instead be delivered, i think (i.e.
should porn come under some kind of restrictions?). Reasonable
questions towards usefulness instead of towards emotional either/or
tendency.

 Basically, i think pornography is an art form. And in America it
is similar to much of the more tolerated art in its purely topical
interests. Should we blanketly prohibit all porn or judge it on an
individual basis?

 Myself, i am able to visualize that so-called "child pornography"
could evolve away from its adult porn norms and become not only a
depiction but a method towards imagination, ideas, experimentation,
and human analysis - as form of artistic discovery....

 The author's main tactic against porn as a whole, probably didn't
realize how easily other words could fit into their monologue (or
did they?). Use `art' in the space: "art is not about expression -
it's about power. How can you tell it's about power? It's about who
gets to look at who's body parts without asking; it's about who
gets to decide the dominant images in our society - about who
controls the art industry (guess which class?); who it is created
for (art magazines are for investors aren't they?). Ask anyone what
they think art is; they'll probably tell you one thing but leave
out the part about artists who suffer depressed alcoholic
lives...."

 A blanket, emotion-grabbing judgement can be questioned quite
easily if thought about a little. And while individuals' negative
experiences should not go silenced, nor should they be more equal
than individuals with positive pornographic experiences.

 The author goes on to say things about how they have `nowhere' to
go for a mutual respect of their insights, analysis, or
feelings...i think that's only half of the story, and emotionally
I want to scream right back as i can list all the constant TV talk
shows, magazine articles, newspaper stories, letters to editors,
etc., etc. which speak, speak, bolster and speak about Victimism
(oh no, not another `ism'). But i catch myself; those are pretty
superficial and centered on sensationalism and money
squandering...but i put my nose down when victimism (that victim-
hood which is socially recognized as able to be a victim) thinks it
can have the entire picture all by itself; that it, alone, is
entitled to understanding...while those also victims (but not at
this time fitting within the acceptable boundaries)-such as the
silenced prisoners of consensual intergenerational sex - can be
damned for all the fuck you care. Such unfashionable victims,
underage minors as well as adults, who've been sentenced by today's
dogma to lives of suffering that have no place to be heard. Yet you
with your mainstream spotlight speak of not having enough....

 But what ground is being gotten by our finger-shaking parades? For
you to know my anger may enlighten your tunnel vision, but the more
important thing is that we can join as angry people together.

 By realizing that porn in and of itself is not an evil, and as
well that it is the mindset behind the method and not a people, is
to find a cooperative and constructive solution to what ails all of
us.

 Blame only perpetuates extremes that swing a pendulum from one
side to another. The `evil' that blocks us is not, i believe, made
up of tools (pornography, guns, or water) but of thought processes
which i call mindsets. The same mindset process is i believe behind
the `solution' that allows war to perpetuate, racism to function,
or kids forced to attend piano lessons.

 As mindsets aligning with anarchist freethought, we should be
among the first ones to come forth from the mudslinging with a ray
of hope. Groups of people who can't help not fitting into today's
social dogma are not the block that pesters justice and `freedom',
but the mindsets and attitudes within them. Blame solves no
problems, but enlightened cooperation in a mutually beneficial
arena does.
                                    C.D., "somewhere in Portugal"

Valuable time
Dear editor,

 It seems Anarchy, the journal of desire armed, has decided to join
forces with the rest of the mainstream media in its vilification of
political correctness. This is the only thing that can explain the
exceedingly stupid `advertisement' which parodies politically
correct use of language in the anti-civilization issue. What do you
suggest we do? Either you call people by how you value them or you
call them by how others call them. The others which the parody
seemed to agree with are those who call blacks niggers, because
they lack status, and women fucks, because they're sex objects.
Congratulations on your integrity.

 As for the rest of the issue, I remain unimpressed. Anti-civism
is plainly stupid. There is no way to feed all the people of Earth,
if we are to go back to the trees. Either you wish a massive die-
out, and you're a Nazi and we know how to treat you, or you wish
people to receive their due, and primitivism goes out the window.

 Michael William's two essays, one a straw man and the other just
plain griping with no solution. The first, on the incredibly bad
art-work of a local artist and the politically correct reaction to
it, was a straw man against the feminists who saw fit not to show
it. The beef of these women was not against only primitivism (what
William focusses on) but primitivism and stereotypes together. Then
he contradicts himself by basically implying that these feminists
were censoring the art-work by not showing it. According to this
same `logic' William's favorite local book-shop, La Librairie
Alternative, is censoring Marx and Hitler by not selling (at
incredibly low prices, admittedly) Capital and Mein Kampf.

 Plainly, in a capitalist society, if a book-seller doesn't want
to sell a book, for whatever reason, then she/he need not sell it.
I recommend Atlas Shrugged, by the incredibly dumb Ayn Rand, for an
understanding of this aspect of capitalism. (I'm thinking here of
character Hank Reardon's treatment of those on his property who
spoke things he didn't approve of.)

 Then there's William on bicycling. Perhaps we'd best not do
anything to attempt to alleviate pollution. After all, cycling is
oppressive. Right.

 Then there's Zerzan on the origins of civilization. Note that a
not-so-careful reading reveals that our weirdest avant-gardist
isn't able to get any anthropologist to corroborate his most
interesting theses, namely, that language and time are oppressive.
This is probably because, as a cursory glance would reveal, these
are part of human nature and if, as Zerzan's essay indicates, the
human brain is the same now as it was in primitive times (as it may
or may not be), then the primitives would have language and time.
Also, anthropologists have yet to unearth a culture which lacks
these fundamentals of being human, at least as Zerzan presents his
case. And I guess Zerzan goes ahead and begs the question and says
"See what a corrupting influence civilization has?" It's explained
by Douglas Kellner's Jean Baudrillard that what Baudrillard is
doing is science fiction. I would suggest that this is what Zerzan
is doing and I would also suggest that he either write for science
fiction magazines, and give up on anarchism, or he follow his own
ideology and shut up.

 I read Perlman's whole book once already and I found it in-
teresting. But, as I see it, there ain't no way to get that kind of
society without a mass die-off.

 Thank you for your valuable time.
                                                       Sincerely,
                                       G.T., Point-Claire, Qu‚bec

Fundamentally evil
Dear friends,

 [...] There's this old but persistent objection to anarchy: who's
going to build the sewer system? And what's to stop some neigh-
borhood bully setting himself up as a warlord, or racist gangs just
hanging people, etc. These objections rely on the assumption that
once released from an elaborate written law code enforced by
violence or the threat of violence, people will naturally refuse to
perform the less glamorous tasks, and instead go around looting and
killing. There's the assumption that human nature is fundamentally
evil, or at least selfish, hence we need a strong law system to
force people to restrain their destructive impulses. Some anar-
chists take a more optimistic view of human nature, suggesting the
less that (official) morality is imposed by violence, the more that
innate human morality will manifest itself. I'd like to agree with
this latter view, but it does require a leap of faith, considering
the current state of affairs in the world.

 So I think to meet this common objection, to overcome the problem
it represents, is going to require something like a profound re-
orientation in the minds and lifestyles of the majority of humans,
so that we become accustomed to the exercise of our own self-
generated morality. In fact, the transformation required is such
that I could call it spiritual (in a non-Theistic sense). How do we
go about all this? The anti-religious tone of some of your
cartoons, articles, and especially letters seems to stem from that
process of intense symbolic repudiation so characteristic of people
still struggling to break free of the influence of some (usually
institutional) aspect of religion. It's a pity that religion
(institutions, doctrines, prescribed answers) gets mixed up with
spirituality. In my years meandering in Asia, England and America,
I've met a few (a very few) people of advanced spirituality, and
without exception I have found them to be, in their personal mental
lives, true anarchists, recognizing the fiction of governmental
worldviews, just as they recognize the merely expedient nature of
dogma. They may or may not be `politically' active in a con-
ventional sense.

 I guess I'm mainly saying that, hidden within some strands of some
religious traditions, there are physical and mental techniques
which have the effect of demonstrating at all levels of
consciousness the pure arbitrariness of all the personal and social
paradigms which limit and control, even define, our sense of
freedom. For me, Anarchy is the attempt to break free of limiting
paradigms. Also, for me, spiritual practice is the attempt to break
through limiting paradigms. I realize this might come across like
New Age babble, or like I'm trying to sell something, but I'm not.
Only suggest. The conscious mind is only a small part of what we
are, and I suggest that we have to derive strength from deeper
within ourselves in order to pit ourselves against the intimidating
weaponry of the current incarnation of the capitalist system.
Otherwise, many of us will despair, give up, grow bitter, or become
addicted to obsessive (but shallow) anti-establishment postures.
And in the end, have no answer when someone says: "Anarchy? But
what would stop people from killing each other?"
                                                E.R., Goleta, CA.

What's wrong with
capitalism?
Question: What's wrong with capitalism?
Answer: An accounting temp. agency just called me. They had an
accounts payable assignment for me. They called the bus company to
make certain I could get there. They got an OK from the company so
they could pay me $7/hour. They double-checked with me to be
certain I would be happy with all this. I assured them I just got
a haircut yesterday, have suitable attire (includes white shirt,
shined shoes and necktie), and would be on time Monday morning.
They called the company back to let them know all was set, and some
greedy asshole at the company decided they didn't want to pay the
rate, and wanted to know if I would do the job for $6/hour. Aside
from the fact I usually get $10/hr. for this type of work, I told
them I would never do anything so idiotic as an A/P job (electronic
A/P processing, processing all the salesmen's reports, photocopy-
ing, and filing, and who knows what else) for $6/hr. I did thank
them for making it understandable to me how Dane County has a 3.2%
unemployment rate. Of course it is true that the weak and
disorganized here are letting this type of corporate shit take
advantage of them, and that's how you get a meaningless figure like
a 3.2% unemployment rate.

 This example from real life is being sent to you in the hope that
it will encourage you and your friends to destroy what is left of
global criminally insane corporate monoculture, and get back to
life here as it was intended to be lived, in balance.

 Do it!
                                               C.S., Madison, WI.

Deceived mentally
Dear Anarchos,

 To those of you that are anarchs & trying to be spiritual and/or
into new age thought/ metaphysics you might run across a book
called The Lion Path, either on your own or mentioned in a book
called Linda Goodman's Star Signs. If you are not psychic (don't
have visions, etc.), then I would say get on it, it's the quickest
way up to a better world. If you are psychic, I must warn you:
you'll be very possibly attacked/deceived mentally, physically &
spiritually by an evil entity (the worst authoritarian you'll ever
wanna meet), yes they exist. I know. It's why the world is the way
it is. If you choose it, do everything you can to guard yourself.
An excellent book that deals w/this subject is called Psychic Self-
Defense by Dion Fortune. There are other books I'm sure but I have-
n't run across them yet. I've been attacked by the garbage for 2«
years now, & most intensely for the last 7 months. I can answer any
questions you might have, if any.

 Thanks for listening. Please print my name w/the address.
                                                   Chris L. Moore
                                                 316 E. Locust #2
                                      Bloomington, IL. 61701-3155

I'm all alone out here
 Greetings and salutations anarchist comrades! I'm an anarchist
from the San Francisco Bay Area, being held a P.O.W. in this
prehistoric, fascist, racist Arizona police state. I'm doing 15
calendar years for burglary because I refused to turn "state's
evidence" and send my cohorts to prison (take the "easy way out").
So I became the "enemy of the state," and they got immunity from
prosecution in exchange for their `cooperation'. I was only 18
years old at the time, and didn't know they could convict you on
the uncorroborated testimony of an accomplice. I learned the hard
way.

 That was in 1982, and I've been learning ever since. Aside from
an 18-month `furlough' that I took as an escaped fugitive, I've
been locked up in this redneck wasteland of a state all this time.
I'm something of a "management problem" to these people, and
they've got me permanently housed in their supermaximum-security
control unit, in virtual solitary confinement. I haven't seen any
daylight for 2 years now, and my release date is November 1998. I
am considered to be a "security risk," and a threat to the
institution, because I'm totally dedicated to smashing the state -
any way I can! I refuse to `work', refuse to `program', cooperate,
submit to urinalysis testing, or anything else they expect us to
conform to. They persecute me because I have very strong spiritual,
ethical, and personal convictions that come from the heart, and I
will not violate. I believe in the Old School principles, which
they are trying to eradicate through insidious psychological
operations - by breeding a `snitch' mentality in the new breed,
racial discord, disinformation, etc. Divide and rule. Unfortu-
nately, the majority of these so-called `convicts' in this prison
system are so damn ignorant and stupid that they actually do The
Man's job for him. They even help build new prisons, to lock more
people up, for slave wages. Creature comforts, selfishness, and
egotism have replaced ideology in here.

 I'm all alone out here, and am doing "hard time" so to speak. I
have virtually no one that I can relate to in terms of ideology,
and all of my dealings with my fellow prisoners in here are fairly
superficial. I have no family, and am totally destitute; the state
saw to it that I lost all of my worldly possessions. These pigs
don't provide us with anything, and make us purchase whatever we
need with our own money. I'm having a hard time just getting basic
necessities for myself, let alone being able to mail-order any
literature to study and better myself with, or buy some food from
the commissary here. I am a strict vegetarian, and believe me,
that's no small feat in prison, when you don't have the food that
you need available to you.

 I am hoping there are some people out there who care enough to
help me out. Donations of stamps and/or money orders - even five
dollars or so -  would be greatly appreciated, and used primarily
to further my `subversive' educational endeavors and to purchase
personal necessities, writing materials, etc. If a handful of
people were to help me out with just a few dollars a piece, or pass
the hat around within their respective groups, my life would be a
whole lot better in here. I might even be able to have something of
a `Christmas'. Moral support is greatly appreciated as well, and
your correspondence, flyers, photocopied articles, etc., are most
welcome; I will definitely write back, but need stamps to do so. I
am a veteran convict, and have a wealth of knowledge to share with
others, especially when it comes to "an ounce of prevention," i.e.
security, helping people avoid making needless mistakes and getting
themselves busted.

 I would also appreciate any information, addresses, resources, and
contacts that may be of use to me to get something going for myself
and generate my own income. I would really like to pull my own
weight and earn my own way if at all possible. If anyone can help
me to help myself, please write...or just write to just write!
                                           Gregory Waleski #47190
                                             Arizona State Prison
                                                         POB 4000
                                              Florence, AZ. 85232

Anti-porn questions
Questions for the Editors and readers of Anarchy:

 Power, here, means exercising a relationship where one (some) is
(are) made to comply to another (others).

 Many of the following questions can be credited to C. MacKinnon's
analysis in "Toward a Feminist Theory of the State." (Don't panic
over the word state [by which she seems to imply only social
structure]. She says feminists don't currently have a theory of
social structure, only that it should not dominate life. There's a
good chance that many anarchists will find this very radical book
enlightening.)

 Isn't anarchism an ideology in that it has at least one tenet:
power should be opposed?

 Why is porn, essentially male? Why does porn show women bound,
women battered and defiled, women killed. Even soft porn shows
women accessible, have-able, wanting to be taken and used by men?
Isn't this inconsistent with mutuality in society?

 Don't the essential areas porn deals with suggest that it is con-
structing a kind of sexuality whose major theme is power? Is power
OK if it can be classified as erotica?

 Is porn harmless fantasy? Or, does it tie dominance to pleasure?
Aren't women (and children) sexually objectified by porn? Doesn't
objectification mean having a social meaning imposed that sets the
stage for sexual use?

 If anarchists can see through the state's legitimized coercion
being rationalized as consent, isn't there a parallel with porn? Is
it sexually undominated women that are consenting to make porn? Is
the appearance of consent concealing the reality of force? Do women
(in the male dominated society) control access to their bodies? If
they do, why is abortion a social problem?

 Why do normal men viewing porn become more aroused to scenes of
rape than to scenes of explicit, but not expressly violent sex,
even if the women are shown hating it (MacKinnon, p.144, note 51)?
Doesn't this observation support the notion "porn is the theory of
rape?" Why do victim's reports of rape look a lot like what porn
says is sex? Is this porn-rape connection because men are
inherently disposed to sex-power; or are social constructions
involved? Is it male anarchist desire armed that prefers the
depictions of porn to those of love and affection?

 Can't porn be about power, not about (mutual) sex and still be
about sex (the eroticization of domination)? If porn were
recognized as a form of social power that needed to be defended
against, because of its destructive effects on women, would it be
OK for women to seek legal protections, just as anarchists do when
absolutely necessary?

 What does Bob Black have against radical feminists in general
(called know-nothings) and MacKinnon in particular (demeaned as a
Popess)?

 Isn't it possible that anti-feminist anarchists suffer from blind
spots as a result of their (unwitting?) enjoyment of sexual power?
Doesn't understanding porn have to get past liberalism's legal
tradition of neutralization through abstraction from the realities
of power, a tradition that has authoritatively defined porn as not
about women but about sex, hence about morality, and as not about
acts or practices, but about ideas? Isn't it radical feminism whose
concern with power is first political, not moral? If pedophilia
can't be condemned morally (as Jason says there are no universal
moral laws), does this mean it can't be condemned at all, even by
a power analysis?

 Do antifeminist anarchists support the liberal argument that porn
is free speech? Isn't it possible, in a society of inequality, that
free speech doesn't help discover the truth so much as it allows
the powerful to impress their view upon a despairing acquiescence
providing the appearance of consent even as speech (in power) is
using that power to make its vision into reality, which then
passes, objectively, for truth? Doesn't porn, as free speech, thus
silence the radical feminist political critique of porn as power-
sex?

 If no empirical evidence can undermine the position in power
(because what can count as evidence is prescribed by the powerful),
isn't an anti-power change in consciousness necessary and isn't
this more than an individual undertaking? Isn't such a change the
kind of thing dissidents (feminists, anarchists) might undertake
communally without being condemned as ideological? Isn't it
possible that some anarchist men "just don't get it?"

 Maybe antifeminist anarchists are hiding in a privatized liberal-
ism when it comes to pedophilia and porn - scared to tell other men
what they can and cannot have sexual access to, because (in the
typical liberal rationalization) if you do not let them have
theirs, they might not let you have yours?

 Isn't it more difficult to discern sexual freedom against a
background, a standard, of sexual coercion than antifeminist
anarchists are allowing? Why is it, for example, that what feminist
politics identifies as central in women's subordination - the
eroticization of dominance and submission - a genre of anarchist
morality finds relatively harmless or defends as affirmatively
valuable as freedom? What, specifically is being defended in the
antifeminist positions as higher than the efforts of women to be
rid of male dominance? Can sexual freedom extend to support for the
union of children to have children when clearly they are not up to
the responsibilities?

 Do anarchists have to allow social power to exist, because the
alternative would be censorship - an interference with freedom? Are
all rules (structured relationships) archist? What about structure
that reflects voluntarily shared values in a communal social
consciousness? Does social freedom mean one community can
justifiably decide to dominate another? Can communities of shared
values justifiably ostracize?

 Is the fact that women do not seem very interested in anarchism,
just possibly, due to its failure to support (wholeheartedly)
women's recognition of the social destructiveness of sex as a
division of power? Isn't ideological normalizing involved in anar-
chist antifeminism?
                                              W.B., Edgewood, IA.

Jason wonders:
Anti-anti-porn questions
 For your information, most anarchists, I would guess, don't oppose
`power' itself (in the usual senses of the word). They oppose
hierarchical power, in order that the general populace might em-
power itself, rather than remaining relatively powerless.

 Though I haven't read her work, I find it impossible to believe
that C. MacKinnon doesn't really mean the state when she says "the
state." I'm assuming you're speaking of the infamous anti-porn
feminist who has attempted to impose her censorious, authoritarian
views on the rest of us through the enactment of repressive laws in
several states and Canada! What's she going to have to say to anar-
chists? Go out and get more laws passed to restrict people's
ability to communicate even further, to give the cops even more
excuses to crack down on sex-positive radicals, and to enforce the
narrow sex-negative views of anti-porn feminists? Give us a break!
Her convictions have as much in common with anarchists as Phyllis
Schlafly's do. Your enthusiasm for feminist charlatans like
MacKinnon makes me wonder.

 Here are some questions for you: Why are anti-porn activists so
afraid of sex and depictions of sexual activity? Why is it that
though the vast bulk of porn shows unbound, unbattered, undefiled
human beings, anti-porn zealots insist that virtually every sexual
depiction in our culture shows the opposite? Why don't anti-porn
fanatics ever note that women are depicted bound, battered, tortur-
ed, humiliated, degraded and defiled far more frequently in murder
mysteries or Hollywood movies than they are in mainstream porn? Is
it because this would prove incompatible with the bizarre anti-porn
dogma that "porn is the theory of rape"?

 Isn't there something insane about thinking that there is a `par-
allel' between depictions of sexual bodies and how-to-rape instruc-
tion manuals? If not, should we also consider the parallels between
depictions of people eating food and cannibalism how-to-manuals?
Should there be laws against depicting people eating on the grounds
that all such depictions symbolize ritual cannibalism?

 Why do a portion of the wide variety of pleasurable sexual expe-
riences look so often like what porn depicts? Does this observation
support the notion that "porn is the theory of sex"? (As if sex
needed a theory!) Is the pleasure-porn connection because people
are inherently disposed to take pleasure in sex and depictions of
sexual bodies? Is it anti-porn masochism that prefers playing the
victim to living freely and pleasurably? Is this why anti-porn
repressiveness engenders anti-erotic, hierarchical power? If anti-
porn legislation were recognized as a form of hierarchical power
that needed to be defended against, because of its attacks on human
sexuality, would it be OK for people to ridicule it and flaunt it?

 Is the anti-porn position dependent on misrepresenting itself as
the only feminist position on pornography? If not, why do so many
anti-porn spokespeople insist on misleading or lying about the fact
that the feminist movement has been split in two by the explosive
conflicts between sex-positive and sex-negative (anti-porn)
perspectives? Is the fact that the anti-porn movement has failed to
attract a significant following in the anarchist milieu, just
possibly due to its failure to support (even half-heartedly) women
and men's aspirations for sexual freedom? Is the pretense of anti-
porn activists speaking for all of "feminist politics" - as if all
feminists agreed - any less reprehensible than the pretense of the
U.S. president speaking for all Americans when he announced that
there was no resistance movement during the Gulf War? We all know
what the president was trying to hide; what are the anti-porn
feminists trying so hard to hide?

 Why do so many people write letters to anarchist periodicals which
advocate authoritarian and repressive courses of action? Is it
because they want to be able to complain about being victimized by
the inevitable critical responses? Is there some reason why anti-
porn dogmatists can't try thinking for themselves for a change? Or
are they just too worn out from restating their puerile dogmas
again and again and again and again and again and again...?

Independent state
of Qwa-Ba-Diwa
Dear Editor,

 I am writing to inform you and your readers of the declaration of
the Independent State of Qwa-Ba-Diwa, which comprises the second
largest old-growth rainforest in the World and nearly 3500km2 of
land. This beautiful and rare ecosystem is being threatened with
extinction at the hands of Big Business Clearcut Logging Companies.
Since no treaty has ever been signed with the residing peoples,
according to the British North America Act neither the Federal nor
the Provincial Governments have legal jurisdiction there. The
native peoples were expropriated from their land by the Police, for
the State on behalf of Big Business. Now, since the Native peoples
are faced with imminent annihilation, the result of genocidal
policies enacted by the State, these people are returning from the
concentration camp to their ancestral home. They have pledged non-
violence, but they will not leave their home at any cost.

 Human Rights and Liberation organizations have been mobilized on
the Island to help with the cause. We are now working on informing
the international community of this issue which affects each of us.
I will be joining my new people there soon to help defend the last
3% of old-growth remaining on a once overgrown island, the largest
island in North America. Their society of which I am a part is
matrilineal, communitarian and agrarian-based. Voluntary coop-
eration and mutual aid are practised here where elsewhere they are
only theories in a dreamer's mind. The struggle of the Qwa-Ba-Diwa
and other Native peoples is allied to the struggle of oppressed
peoples everywhere. Native Liberation movements are involved, the
international media has been informed as with Amnesty Int'l and the
General Secretary of the United Nations. Legally, we feel that this
is an airtight case. However, with the Police, State, Media and Big
Business interests at stake, we may see unjustified State-sanc-
tioned violence against these people. We hope that we may be able
to count on the support of the international community should
violence of this type break out. By working on this we also hope to
increase and strengthen the flow of aid between struggles, as we
feel that the time has come to turn up the heat on the system which
is designed to kill the planet.

 Organizations that one would never have seen together a year ago
now recognize the fundamental contradiction of capitalism -
unlimited growth from a finite source, and the lengths that the
hegemonic groups are willing to go in order to preserve the order.
They refuse to admit that capitalism is falling apart at the seams,
but the people are reading between the lies and connecting the dots
and are beginning to see what lies up ahead. We must bring our
economies to a stabilized level, not sustainable development, but
a sustainable system which is both non-capitalist and non-Statist,
if we are to be able to look beyond the next 50 years.

 If you would like more information, or would like to lend a hand,
contact:

John Shafer
Concerned Citizens for Aboriginal Rights
71 Menzies St.
Victoria, B.C. V8V 2G3
Canada
Independent State of Qwa-Ba-Diwa
Terry DeLine
#1203-850 Bidwell St.
Vancouver, B.C. V6G 2J8
Canada
                                  Yours in the Unity of Struggle,
                                             S.D., Victoria, B.C.