Note: Digital Read

URL: http://www.mediafire.com/?25dyiavqyheyede

Summery:

In this interview, he (M-1) shares his thoughts on where hip hop is today, and it’s potential use as a tool for resistance and liberation; his recent trips to Palestine; he election of Barrack Obama; and why dead prez considers Olympia, “one of [their] revolutionary homes.” 

Note: Digital Read

URL: http://www.mediafire.com/?opg167fachei183

Opening: 

“The police become necessary in human society only at that junction in human society where it is split between those who have and those who ain’t got.” -Chairman Omali Yeshitela

Why were the modern police created?

Is is generally assumed, among people who think about it at all, that the police were created to deal with rising levels of crime caused by urbanization and increasing numbers of immigrants. John Schneider describes the typical accounts:

The First studies were legal and administrative in their focus, confined mostly to narrative descriptions of the step-by-step demise of the old constabulary and the stead, but often controversial evolution of the professionals. Scholars seemed preoccupied with the politics of the politics of police reforms. IT causes, on the other hand, were considered only in cursory fashion, more often assumed than proved. Cities, it would seem, moved inevitably toward modern policing as a consequence of soaring levels of crime and disorder in an era of phenomenal grown and profound social change. [1]

I will refer to this as the “crime-and-disorder” theory.

Despite its initial plausibility, the idea that the police were invented in response to an epidemic of crime is, to be blunt, exactly wrong. Furthermore, it is not much of an explanation. It assumes that “when crime reaches a certain level, the ‘natural’ social response is to create a uniformed police force. This, of coarse, is not an explanation but an assertion of natural law for there is little evidence.”

Note: Printed Read -We’ve compiled a zine on our bodies within the context of our trans* and queer experiences. Check it out and distribute!

URL: https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=0B7AZf3-vugyKZDM2NzE2ZjctYzgxMC00YzVhLTlhMjAtZTU0MDgwMTJlYzMz&hl=en

Intro:

I have an awesome body

That’s not what you’d expect to hear from me, knowing that I’m trans and binary. We’re all supposed to want to switch our hormones over, get a mess of surgeries, and so on. And I do want those. But that’s not what this is about. I’m not here to talk about breaking down and crying, though I’ve done that. No, my body is awesome. Sure, it’s got its problems that need to be fixed, but, in the end, it’s my body. I live here. It’s perfectly serviceable, and we’ve been through a lot together. I just need to take charge of its growth now.

This body has done a lot for me. It gets met to class, I take it hiking whenever I go, I use it to ride my bike, I even us it it to control my computer and write my homework answers. More than that, it breathes and circulates blood and resists pathogens and all that other stuff I need it to do so that I can keep living.

Even beyond that, I can look in the mirror and see that I look good. On a good day, I can see a good-looking me in the mirror, and recognize myself in my own gender. It sometimes takes work to get there, work that I would rather not have to do (and will have more permanent solution too soon, I hope), but it can be done. It’s just a new thing to take care of, not only health and cleanliness, but also gendered appearance.

So, it’s a load of work, and has a few things that need to be brought back into control, but it’s still my own very awesome body, and I’m glad to have it. 

Note: This file has a trifold and a zine. I messed up and scanned in two at the same time. 

Note: 1) Trifold 2) Printed read 

URL: http://www.mediafire.com/?h5qvxr508vueg62

Excerpt: 

What To When Someone Tells You that You Violated their Boundaries, Made them feel Uncomfortable, or Committed Assault

Take Responsibility for Your Actions.

-Apologize (if that’s hard: do not say “I’m sorry you feel that way” because that puts the blame on the, instead say “I’m sorry that my actions hurt you.”)

-Admit if you Fucked up on a boundary or went too far.

-Admit what your body did

-Admit what you said

-Admit what you did not say or ask

-Fight off the feelings of defensiveness if you are unable to get past that, tell the other person you need a break so you can respond properly. seek help.

-Admit to yourself that your actions can affect others negatively, regardless of your intentions. 

Note: Digital Read

URL: listed above

Excerpt:

Part I: The Rose of Schooling in Society 

“When examined, ask with questions” - Graffiti Paris, 1968

Most people don’t like being told what to do. Any institution that aims to structure and regiment a person’s life is, to a certain extent, in conflict with that person. The interesting thing is that that person is not always in willful conflict with the institution. Those who are obedient and fulfill their role as students understandably try to ignore the negative effects their schooling is having on them. But who would honestly deny that these effects are quiet visible? Students are taught, through the process of schooling, to be conformist, unimaginative, docile, and a great many other things that are by and large considered virtues in the working world. Stay this way and you may never feel good about yourself, but you will be congratulated by authority figures for the rest of your life. I think that the antagonistic feelings that people have toward school reflect what schools are trying to do to you. Our present situation in which compulsory schooling appears to be so natural has a historical context; the forces at work and reason from a perspective that looks at schooling historically in terms of the means employed and the ends desired and looks at where these institutional designs leave the individual caught up in school. Such a perspective can be revolutionary only if it identifies with the individual caught up in school-with their needs and desires, their anger and frustration. We must look at how schooling fits into the whole of society and what sort of social relationships and institutions are hinged upon keeping this individual- you, for all practical purposes- acquiescent. The problem, namely, that most people do in fact do hat they are told, is a problem with the totality of civilized social relations. 

note: A Printed & Digital Read

URL: http://www.mediafire.com/?0ydbuo9mchh7tru

Description: 

We in the US have been too timid for too long. We are afraid of the cops. We are afraid of losing our jobs or getting expelled from school. No one wants to take risks- so protests are poorly attended and ineffective. Peaceful marches or rallies reduce us to passive observers of what is supposed to be our own activity. We are told to express our anger and frustration by shouting or chanting but otherwise, we are asked to exercise restraint. 

At the UCSC walkout on Sept 24, protestors chanted and carried signs, but they crossed the street only when the ‘walk’ sign was lit. The striking union had a picket line but did not actively prevent people from crossing that line. They  knew that most unions at the UC have contracts which explicitly force their members to cross the picket lines of other unions. 

In Berkeley, at the general assembly held on the same day, protestors were asked: ‘what do you want to do next?’ Nit they were never asked the obvious question- ‘what do you want to do right now?’ Why not decide on an immediate course of action and do it? Organizers complain they are losing members with each successive meeting; they seem to believe that meeting is an end in itself!

This wall of passivity can only be dismantled through action. But equally, we have to avoid the temptation of becoming ‘activists’. On Sept 17, activists interrupted a meeting of the UC Board of Regents. They shouted at Mark Yudof, refused to quiet down and were arrested by the cops. These sacrificial actions are disruptive- but only momentarily. Activists depend on the media to publicize their grievances, but to gain the attention of the media, the have to provoke the administration into an embarrassing confrontation. Administrators are not stupid.  They know how to neutralize these actions: they simply avoid confrontation. After the activists were dragged from the room Yudof said, ‘The students ought to be angry about the fee increases. I’m angry about it too.’

These are the problems we face: not only the cuts- not only the crisis which caused the cuts- but the ineffectiveness of our means of fighting them. We need to build a movement, but we have not been able to do so. People will only join a movement if it has the potential to change something, but a movement will only change something if people have already joined it. So everyone does what is in their own best interests: they ignore the protests and get on with their lives. Better to try to find a new job than waste time failing to get your old one back. The problem is not that people lack a ‘consciousness’ of their own interests.

It is the activists who fail to understand…

Note: Digital Read

URL: http://www.mediafire.com/?n3tmmmflny5

Opening:

Thanks for picking up the outlaws issue of the F-Word! Since our second print ish we’ve gotten picked up by a publisher (woot!), the brand new PM press, based out of Oakland, CA. Very exciting.

So, yay for romanticizing outlaws, misfits, and rebels! We certainly aren’t the first to fall for these dashing types who only fight outside of the law because the law itself is unjust.

Our very own Gender Outlaw Kate Bornstein is featured as feminist hottie in this issue along with Howard Zinn, Loretta Ross, and plenty of other feministy goodness. Enjoy! 

by The Plan B Bureau

Note: Digital Read

URL: http://www.mediafire.com/?22j1nld2onj

Opening:

We define the metropolis as the compact group of territories and heterogeneous devices crossed in every point by a disjunctive synthesis; there is not any point to the metropolis, in fact, where command and resistance, domination and sabotage and not present at the same time. An antagonistic process between two parts, whose relation consists in enmity, totally innervates the metropolis. On one side, it consists, true to it’s etymology, in the exercising of a command that is irradiated on all the other territories - so everywhere is of the metropolis. It is the space in which and from which the intensity and the concentration of devices of oppression, exploitation and domination express themselves in their maximum degree and extension. In the metropolis, the city and the country, modernity and second natures collapse and end. In the metropolis where industry, communication and spectacle make productive whole, the government’s required job consists in connecting and controlling the social cooperation which is at the base to then be able to extract surplus value using biopolitical instruments. On the other side, it is a whole of the territories in which a heterogeneous mix of subversive forces- singular, Common, collective - are able to express the tendentiously more organized and horizontal level of antagonism against command. There are not places and non-places in the metropolis: there are territories occupied militarily by the imperial forces, territories controlled by biopower and territories that enter into resistance. Sometimes, very often, these three types of territories cross one another, other times the later separates itself from the other two and, in yet other occasions, the last enters into war against the first two. The Banlieue is emblematic of this “third” territory: but if everywhere is of the metropolis, then its also true that everywhere is of the Banlieue. In the metropolitan extension of Common life, the intensity of the revolutionary imagination of the communism-to-come lives.

by Zabalaza Books

Note: Digital Read

URL: http://www.mediafire.com/?jm4njtyyj3m

Introduction:

This is a text which, we hope, faces in two directions. On the one hand we hope that it will be read by people interested in animal liberation who want to consider why animal exploitation exists, as we as how. On the other hand, by those who define themselves as anarchists or communists who either dismiss animal liberation altogether or personally sympathize with it but don’t see how it relates to their broader political stance. 

While there have always been groups and individuals with feet in both camps, for the most part discussion between those involved in animal liberation and communists has been at a derisory level. ‘Debate,’ in so far as it exists, consists manly of abuse and rarely moves beyond the level of comments like ‘wasn’t Hitler a vegetarian’ (actually not- he injected ‘bulls blood’ into his testicles, and does this mean you can’t be a communist and a house painter or an Austrian?).

We hope to prompt the beginnings of a real debate about the relationship between the ‘animal question’ and the ‘social question’. This text does not claim to have all the answers or be the ‘communist manifesto’ for animals, but we think it does pose some of the key questions. Over to you…

by Paul Street

note: Printed Read

URL: http://www.mediafire.com/?2m1f5kmmyny

Opening:

These are dangerous and confusing times. Let’s take a look at an interesting formulation from an unusually long and dramatic lead editorial in a recent issue of liberal-left weekly “The Nation”:

“World opinion is against the US escalation in Iraq. The American people are against it. Congress is against it. The Iraqi government is against it. Can a single man fore a nation to fight a war it does not want to fight, expand a war it does not want to expand? If he can is that nation any longer a democracy in any meaningful sense? If not, how long can democratic rule and republican form of government rule be restored?”

The ominous paragraph constitutes the cover of the magazine’s “February 5th” issue (“The Nation” dates its issues a week in advance of the day you see them on the newsstand or in your mailbox). Later in the editorial,”The Nation” says the following:

“It is not only the Vietnam syndrome but the Watergate syndrome that [the Bush administration] want[s] to overcome. If the keynote of [Richard] Nixon’s character was covertness (not for nothing was he called Tricky Dick), then the keynote of Bush’s character is brazenness: he seeks to carry out in broad daylight, his formal right, the usurpations that Nixon committed under the cover of night. Thus, the deepest theme of the whole three-decade story, now presented in almost outlandish caricature by the President’s tug of war with the nation the world over Iraq, is the issue of power and how it shall be constituted in the United States, and the deepest question the crisis presents is whether the country will continue to be a constitutional republic or bow down to the new system of one-man rule asserted by President Bush. It’s an issue that must concern every citizen, and the antiwar movement is in fact reviving it.”

After some intelligent reflections on the need to combine efforts to de-fund and end the occupation of Iraq with citizen actions, resolutions, and investigations that would lead to impeachment, The Nation hopes that the American people and Congress can act together to save the “Republic”

Note: 1) This is a Digital read. 2) This zine has passed into discontinuation of print. 3) This isn’t the full zine sadly, but what I have of it. My friend Billy has the zine.. I’m hoping he’ll possibly send me a copy of it or something. Regardless, what i have of it is quiet extensive.

URL: http://www.mediafire.com/?ftdkdkohz3y

Intro:

Up until recently the terms anarchism and feminism were rarely found in the same sentence, much less interpreted as integrally related. Indeed ‘anarcha-feminist’ would appear almost as an oxymoron, Emma Goldman being the single example most people could identify as such.

With this important collection of and about anarcha-feminists over more than a century, stunning female anarchist heroes are restored to our collective memory. And this collection is only a sampling that should lead readers to other foremothers of anarcha-feminism, such as Lucy Parsons, Mother Jones, Jessie Bross Lloyd, Hortensia Black, Sarah Ames, Lizzie Swank Holmes, Johana Greie, Kate Austin, Helen Keller, Lousie Michel, Azecena Fernandez Barbra, and thousands of other historical figures and contemporary feminist anarchists. 

The historical amnesia we suffer serves well the state authorities, military-industrial civilization, and capitalist thieves that control our lives and destinies. The Sixties Liberation movements broke through the chains that bound us, thinking we are the first generation to do so, only to discover we had true rebel heroes we could and must learn from and be inspired by. Most of the current younger generation is ignorant of past struggles unless they happen upon some of the small press publications such as this one. Bombarded as we are by the obvious fakery of the mainstream press and textbooks, we often become nihilistic rather than pro-active.

Young working class woman, in particular, being prisoners of the beauty myth and consumer culture, have been short-changed. For in the piecing together of a usable radical past in recent years, women have hardly been present in terms of liberating role models, rather only as an icon or two, or a Florence Nightinggale kind of nurturing woman. Women like Voltairine de Cleyre, Emma Goldman, and Charlotte Wilson are something else, being independent, pro-birth control, and anti-marriage before women had even the right to vote. They were lifelong agitators, on the move, speaking to large and small gatherings, writing calls to action and social/political critiques. They were far ahead of anarchist men in their vision of freedom.

Just like today, men find it difficult or unthinkable to not only give up their male privileges but also their sense of supremacy. Independent radical women often live lonely live if they expect equality. Our task as anarcha-feminists  can be nothing less than changing the world and to do that we need to consult our heroic predecessors.