Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

WRECK: The Uncut Voice

Expand Messages
  • ninplant@xs4all.nl
    wReck thiS meSS ~ Radio Patapoe 97.2 ~ Amsterdam Ethno-Illogical Psycho-Radiographies: no. 273: The Uncut Voice* streaming in the ether and via internet:
    Message 1 of 1 , Jan 16, 2005
      wReck thiS meSS ~ Radio Patapoe 97.2 ~ Amsterdam

      Ethno-Illogical Psycho-Radiographies: no. 273: The Uncut Voice*

      streaming in the ether and via internet: <http://freeteam.nl/patapoe/>
      we now also stream at <http://freeteam.nl:8000/patapoe.m3u>

      13 December 2004

      "I will never apologise for the United States. I don't care what the
      facts are."
      o George Bush, Sr.

      "As the rift between the rich and poor grows, as the need to
      appropriate and control the world's resources to feed the great
      capitalist machine becomes more urgent, the unrest will only
      o Arundhati Roy
      Arnhem / Oslo 3 > Maja S.K. Ratkje vs Jaap Blonk [1]
      Bird's Bath > Greetje Bijma [2]
      Oslo 6 > Maja S.K. Ratkje vs Jaap Blonk [1]
      Stolen Kisses > Erika Stucky [3]
      Erzherzog-Johann-Jodler > Brigitt's Trio [4]
      Little Sister > Dodo Hug [5]
      Wiggle > Erika Stucky [3]
      My Way > Nina Hagen [6]
      Ishtar > Sussan Deyhim & Richard Horowitz [7]
      Mudra > Miss Nelson & Bruce Haack [8]
      Responsateen > Mechanical Servants [9]
      Miss Tazniff Goes to Town Riding on a Pony > Solomonoff & Von Hoffmanstahl [10]
      Tipsy > Erika Stucky [3]
      Central Park > Nina Simone [11]
      Guru Guru Gate > Jackson MacLow [12]
      War of Dreams > Shelley Hirsch [13]
      Annazone > Anna Maria Kieffer & Leo Kupper [14]
      Confidente de la Nuit > Lizzy Mercier Descloux [15]
      A Moscou > Le Tone vs Judith [16]
      New Day > Sounds from the Ground vs. Aine [17]
      Décollage > Honeymoon Killers [7]
      The Best is Yet to Come > Blossom Dearie [18]
      Crazy > Hazel-Marie [19]
      Als Ik 's Morgens Naar Het Dal Toe Ga > Olga Lowina [20]
      He Taught Me to Yodel > Hazel-Marie [19]
      I Can' Stay Mad At You > Skeeter Davis
      Porch > Meredith Monk
      I Can't Stand It > Beth Anderson [21]
      Aba Alme Lemenea > Abyssinia Infinite [22]
      Boo Hoo Blues > Carolina Cotton [23]
      S'Ichi Nani Lang Das Graglet Het > Christina Lauterberg & Doppelbock [24]
      Lollipop Man > Uw Hond [25]
      You're Getting' A Good Girl > Carolina Cotton [22]


      [*] Again struggling to catch up. some more urgent and cogent shows
      came up and needed to get out there. With each passing year time
      accelerates and the chores and activities that seem to be required or
      compulsively compulsory seem to increase. coming to the US in April,
      terrorizing the Midwest with yodeling. Also NY. There are 2 proposals
      for yodels festivals this summer in amsterdam area. Two proposals for
      yodel CD compilations and two documentary yodel film proposals making
      the rounds...

      [1] "Improv-isers" on Kontrans <www.toondist.nl>. Recorded live at
      the Ijsbreker here in Amsterdam. This is proof that logorrhea can
      smell like an impertinent champagne.

      [2] "Sit Down, ListenŠ" on BV Haast <www.bvhaast.nl>
      <www.greetjebijma.nl>. Brilliant and dynamic avant vocalization from
      this Dutch ululator. Interesting combination of scat-abstract with
      poetry [Yeats], jazz [Abby Lincoln] and other recuperated material.
      Highly recommended.

      [3] "Lovebites" on Traumton <www.traumton.de> <www.erikastucky.com>.
      Imagine the ribald humor and cultural omniverousness of Anne Magnuson
      and the bawdy sensual presence of Mae West or Marlene Dietrich.

      [4] "Jodler und Musik mit Bravour" on ML vinyl. Yodeling and other
      indecencies in lederhosen hot pants.

      [5] "Kaleidofon" on Zyt. This Swiss cabaret star stretches vocals and
      emotion into new shapes and conceptions. Humorous, yodeling,
      multi-octaved and multi-talentedŠ

      [6] "In Ekstasy" on CBS, 1985. This is a prime example of creative
      drugs used as a hammer. This is one REALLY bad record. Almost
      unlistenable especially considering how much hope she evoked only a
      few years earlier as a kind of outer space east german version of
      Patti Smith or something. Lost in Space with a bad band, bad look,
      bad sound, and a horrible producer!!

      [7] "Crammed Global Soundclash 1980-89: Part One - World Fusion" on
      Crammed <crammed@...>. amazingly prescient and adventurous
      label presents a dj-segue-style mix of some of their great shorter
      material. The Maboul cut is one of my faves of all time and may be
      one of the first scratch records [1983] ever. Great scratch loop.

      [8] "The Best of Dimension 5" on Dimension 5. The Mike Nichols &
      Elaine May of the underground set?

      [9] "Min X Match" on Mystery Toast 1980. Albany band that came across
      as Devo meets Wanda Jackson. From the hot burgeoning Albany scene of
      the early 1980s. Pam Mechserv was a steamy robotic vocalizer who
      could certainly oil your bolts as they used to say in the Albany new
      wave scene.

      [10] "Miss Tazniff Goes to Town Riding on a Pony" on S&V
      <ds@...>. The Baader-Meinhof couple of the no-wave set
      ca. 1980s NY. Their sound was able to detect a spiritual toupee at
      100 feet. Most haircut hipsters drew the line at S&V. They made
      Throbbing Gristle sound like an Archies side band project. Now making
      the Albany area a more conscientious place to live.

      [11] "My Baby Just Cares About Me" on Black Box. Martyred life of
      being shunted in the US for her outspoken criticism of life as a
      black woman. Feisty & difficult, she confined herself to mostly
      touring Europe for the last 25 years of her life. Recently deceased.

      [12] "Totally Corrupt" on Giorno Poetry Systems Dial a Poet series.
      When I bought this I truly believed in the subversive, anarcho,
      dangerous, scurrilous nature of words [a la Burroughs, Celine, GenetŠ]

      [13] "Far In, Far Out" on Tzadik. Brilliant tight rope walker as she
      straddles the worlds of cabaret and avant garde abstract vocals.
      Brilliant. And she yodels in a way that is insidiously effortless and

      [14] "Ways of the Voice" on Pogus <www.pogus.com>. Brilliant vocals
      that call in the birds from several continents.

      [15] "Lizzy Mercier Descloux" on CBS 1984. Venturing to Southern
      Africa before Paul Simon and doing a better job at integrating the
      funk without homogenizing it. She is one of the great white funk
      poetesses. I was smitten - a funky french version of Patti Smith, a
      better poetŠ and terribly elusive and anti-careeristŠ

      [16] "In Bloom II" on Aureau Export <www.french-m,usic.org> .
      Excellent sampler of electronica meets post-pop. Stand-outs DJ Cam,
      Kojak, Oscar, Zimpala, Lab, Les ClonesŠ

      [17] "Natural Selection" on Nutone <www.nutonemusic.com>. Clean,
      cool, dubby, trippy, natural-hi beats. Relax those neck muscles.

      [18] "May I Come In?" on capitol vinyl, 1964. Sultry as a
      red-breasted robin on a sagging dark wet branch in late autumn.
      Leaves on the ground. There is a slight breeze and some of those are
      cast airborneŠ

      [19] "Now & Then" on HazelMarie <hazelbil@...>. Very nice
      full-bodied vocals on this CD[r] given to me by poet Eddie Woods. She
      does covers and YODELS on a number of tracks. She is a member of the
      New Brunswick Canada country Music Hall of Fame. Curious who else is
      in there! Hope to interview her for book #2 on yodeling, YODELING IN
      HI FI.

      [20] "Het Beste van Olga Lowina" on Telstar. Imagine a woman pinioned
      somewhere between brilliant yodeler and bad taste, between an opera
      singer and a female wrestler. She could belt them out with the best
      gospel belters from the Deep SouthŠ

      [21] "Peachy Keen-O" on Pogus <www.pogus.com>. Excellent archival
      reappreciated pioneer vocalist, soundsmithŠ Top 30 for 2004.

      [22] "World 2004" on Wrasse <www.wrasserecords.com> Non-patronizing
      world music not afraid to be non-pure and folksy. Good antidote to
      the easy listening of some Putumayo collections.

      [23] "Yodel Yodel Yodel" on Binge <www.dagmar-anita-binge.de>. Simply
      put: This is one of my favorite records of 2004.

      [24] "Rund um de Buuchnabel" on Narrenschiff <www.doppel-bock.ch/>.
      Excellent folksy inventiveness with the John Coltrane of Jaw's Harp,
      Anton Bruhin and Doppelbock and some CL yodeling.

      [25] "God's Bathroom" on Uw Hond <www.uwhond.com>. Joyous post-noise
      art-core in an 80s no wave style. No future No frites.

      Public Power in the Age of Empire by ARUNDHATI ROY [downloaded from
      Interactivist & excerpted]

      "ŠTwo thousand and one was not the first year that the U.S.
      government declared a "war on terrorism." As Noam Chomsky reminds us,
      the first "war on terrorism" was declared by President Ronald Reagan
      in the 1980s during the U.S.-sponsored terrorist wars across Central
      America, the Middle East, and Africa. The Reagan administration
      called terrorism a "plague spread by depraved opponents of
      civilisation itself." In keeping with this sentiment, in 1987, the
      United Nations General Assembly proposed a strongly worded
      condemnation of terrorism. One hundred and fifty-three countries
      voted for it. Only the United States and Israel voted against it.
      They objected to a passage that referred to "the right to
      self-determination, freedom, and independence... of people forcibly
      deprived of that right... particularly peoples under colonial and
      racist regimes and foreign occupation." Remember that in 1987, the
      United States was a staunch ally of apartheid South Africa. The
      African National Congress and Nelson Mandela were listed as
      "terrorists." The term "foreign occupation" was taken to mean
      Israel's occupation of Palestine. Over the last few years, the "war
      on terrorism" has mutated into the more generic "war on terror."
      Using the threat of an external enemy to rally people behind you is a
      tired old horse that politicians have ridden into power for
      centuries. But could it be that ordinary people are fed up with that
      poor old horse and are looking for something different?Š Before
      Washington's illegal invasion of Iraq, a Gallup International poll
      showed that in no European country was the support for a unilateral
      war higher than 11 per cent. On February 15, 2003, weeks before the
      invasion, more than 10 million people marched against the war on
      different continents, including North America. And yet the
      governments of many supposedly democratic countries still went to
      war. The question is: is "democracy" still democratic? Are
      democratic governments accountable to the people who elected them?

      ŠAl Qaeda made the people of the United States pay with their lives
      for the actions of their government in Palestine, Saudi Arabia, Iraq,
      and Afghanistan. The U.S. government has made the people of
      Afghanistan pay in the thousands for the actions of the Taliban and
      the people of Iraq pay in the hundreds ofthousands for the actions of
      Saddam Hussein. The crucial difference is that nobody really elected
      Al Qaeda, the Taliban, or Saddam Hussein. But the President of the
      United States was elected (well... in a manner of speaking). The
      Prime Ministers of Italy, Spain, and the United Kingdom were elected.
      Could it then be argued that citizens of these countries are more
      responsible for the actions of their government than Iraqis were for
      the actions of Saddam Hussein or Afghans for the Taliban? Whose God
      decides which is a "just war" and which isn't? George Bush senior
      once said: "I will never apologise for the United States. I don't
      care what the facts are." When the President of the most powerful
      country in the world doesn't need to care what the facts are, then we
      can at least be sure we have entered the Age of Empire.

      AND what of the U.S. elections? Do U.S. voters have a real choice?Š
      the real concern is that in the new administration their policies
      will continue. That we will have Bushism without Bush. Those
      positions of real power - the bankers, the CEOs - are not vulnerable
      to the vote (and in any case, they fund both sides).

      Unfortunately, the U.S. elections have deteriorated into a sort of
      personality contest, a squabble over who would do a better job of
      overseeing Empire. John Kerry believe[d] in the idea of Empire as
      fervently as George Bush does. The U.S. political system has been
      carefully crafted to ensure that no one who questions the natural
      goodness of the military-industrial-corporate structure will be
      allowed through the portals of power. Given this, it's no surprise
      that in this election you have two Yale University graduates, both
      members of Skull and Bones, the same secret society, both
      millionaires, both playing at soldier-soldier, both talking up war,
      and arguing almost childishly about who will lead the war on terror
      more effectively. Like President Bill Clinton before him, Kerry
      [would have continued] the expansion of U.S. economic and military
      penetration into the world. He says he would have voted to authorise
      Bush to go to war in Iraq even if he had known that Iraq had no
      weapons of mass destruction. He promise[d] to commit more troops to
      Iraq. So, underneath the shrill exchange of insults, there is
      almost absolute consensus. It looks as though even if people in the
      United States vote for Kerry, they'll still get Bush. President John
      Kerbush or President George Berry. It's not a real choice. It's an
      apparent choice. Like choosing a brand of detergent. Whether you buy
      Ivory Snow or Tide, they're both owned by Proctor & Gamble.

      ŠBut why is it that the Democrats do not even have to pretend to be
      against the invasion and occupation of Iraq? If the anti-war movement
      openly campaigns for Kerry, the rest of the world will think that it
      approves of his policies of "sensitive" imperialism. Is U.S.
      imperialism preferable if it is supported by the United Nations and
      European countries? Is it preferable if the U.N. asks Indian and
      Pakistani soldiers to do the killing and dying in Iraq instead of
      U.S. soldiers? Is the only change that Iraqis can hope for that
      French, German, and Russian companies will share in the spoils of the
      occupation of their country?

      ŠTo put a vulgar point on all of this - the truth is getting more
      vulgar by the minute - the combined wealth of the world's
      billionaires in 2004 (587 "individuals and family units"), according
      to Forbes magazine, is $1.9 trillion. This is more than the gross
      domestic product of the world's 135 poorest countries combined. The
      good news is that there are 111 more billionaires this year than
      there were in 2003. Isn't that fun? The thing to understand is that
      modern democracy is safely premised on an almost religious acceptance
      of the nation state. But corporate globalisation is not. Liquid
      capital is not. So, even though capital needs the coercive powers of
      the nation state to put down revolts in the servants' quarters, this
      set-up ensures that no individual nation can oppose corporate
      globalisation on its own.

      Why does this happen? It is neither true nor useful to dismiss
      Mandela or Lula as weak or treacherous people. It's important to
      understand the nature of the beast they were up against. The moment
      they crossed the floor from the opposition into government they
      became hostage to a spectrum of threats - most malevolent among them
      the threat of capital flight, which can destroy any government
      overnight. To imagine that a leader's personal charisma and history
      of struggle will dent the corporate cartel is to have no
      understanding of how capitalism works, or for that matter, how power
      works. Radical change cannot and will not be negotiated by
      governments; it can only be enforced by people. By the public. A
      public who can link hands across national borders.

      So when we speak of public power in the Age of Empire, I hope it's
      not presumptuous to assume that the only thing that is worth
      discussing seriously is the power of a dissenting public. A public
      that disagrees with the very concept of Empire. A public that has set
      itself against incumbent power - international, national, regional,
      or provincial governments and institutions that support and service
      Empire. Of course those of us who live in Empire's subject nations
      are aware that in the great cities of Europe and the United States,
      where a few years ago these things would only have been whispered,
      there is now open talk about the benefits of imperialism and the need
      for a strong empire to police an unruly world. It wasn't long ago
      that colonialism also sanctified itself as a "civilising mission". So
      we can't give these pundits high marks for originality.

      We are aware that New Imperialism is being marketed as a "lesser
      evil" in a less-than-perfect world. Occasionally some of us are
      invited to "debate" the merits of imperialism on "neutral" platforms
      provided by the corporate media. It's like debating slavery. It isn't
      a subject that deserves the dignity of a debate. What are the
      avenues of protest available to people who wish to resist Empire? By
      resist I don't mean only to express dissent, but to effectively force
      change. Empire has a range of calling cards. It uses different
      weapons to break open different markets. There isn't a country on
      God's earth that is not caught in the cross hairs of the U.S. cruise
      missile and the IMF checkbook. Argentina is the model if you want to
      be the poster boy of neoliberal capitalism, Iraq if you're the black

      For poor people in many countries, Empire does not always appear in
      the form of cruise missiles and tanks, as it has in Iraq or
      Afghanistan or Vietnam. It appears in their lives in very local
      avatars - losing their jobs, being sent unpayable electricity bills,
      having their water supply cut, being evicted from their homes and
      uprooted from their land. All this overseen by the repressive
      machinery of the state, the police, the army, the judiciary. It is a
      process of relentless impoverishment with which the poor are
      historically familiar. What Empire does is to further entrench and
      exacerbate already existing inequalities.

      Even until quite recently, it was sometimes difficult for people to
      see themselves as victims of Empire. But now local struggles have
      begun to see their role with increasing clarity. However grand it
      might sound, the fact is, they are confronting Empire in their own,
      very different ways. Differently in Iraq, in South Africa, in India,
      in Argentina, and differently, for that matter, on the streets of
      Europe and the United States. Mass resistance movements, individual
      activists, journalists, artists, and filmmakers have come together to
      strip Empire of its sheen. They have connected the dots, turned
      cash-flow charts and boardroom speeches into real stories about real
      people and real despair. They have shown how the neoliberal project
      has cost people their homes, their land, their jobs, their liberty,
      their dignity. They have made the intangible tangible. The once
      seemingly incorporeal enemy is now corporeal. This is a huge victory.
      It was forged by the coming together of disparate political groups,
      with a variety of strategies. But they all recognised that the target
      of their anger, their activism, and their doggedness is the same.
      This was the beginning of real globalisation. The globalisation of
      dissent. Broadly speaking, there are two kinds of mass resistance
      movements in Third World countries today. The landless people's
      movement in Brazil, the anti-dam movement in India, the Zapatistas'
      in Mexico, the Anti-Privatisation Forum in South Africa, and hundreds
      of others, are fighting their own sovereign governments, which have
      become agents of the neoliberal project. Most of these are radical
      struggles, fighting to change the structure and chosen model of
      "development" of their own societies. Then there are those fighting
      formal and brutal neocolonial occupations in contested territories
      whose boundaries and fault lines were often arbitrarily drawn last
      century by the imperialist powers. In Palestine, Tibet, Chechnya,
      Kashmir, and several States in India's northeastern provinces, people
      are waging struggles for self-determination. Several of these
      struggles might have been radical, even revolutionary when they
      began, but often the brutality of the repression they face pushes
      them into conservative, even retrogressive spaces where they use the
      same violent strategies and the same language of religious and
      cultural nationalism used by the states they seek to
      replace.ŠMeanwhile, the rift between rich and poor is being driven
      deeper and the battle to control the world's resources intensifies.
      Economic colonialism through formal military aggression is staging a
      comeback. ŠTHE first militant confrontation in the United States
      between the global justice movement and the neoliberal junta took
      place famously at the WTO conference in Seattle in December 1999. To
      many mass movements in developing countries that had long been
      fighting lonely, isolated battles, Seattle was the first delightful
      sign that their anger and their vision of another kind of world was
      shared by people in the imperialist countries.

      ŠAs resistance movements have begun to reach out across national
      borders and pose a real threat, governments have developed their own
      strategies of how to deal with them. They range from cooptation to
      repression. I'm going to speak about three of the contemporary
      dangers that confront resistance movements: the difficult meeting
      point between mass movements and the mass media, the hazards of the
      NGO-isation of resistance, and the confrontation between resistance
      movements and increasingly repressive states. The place in which
      the mass media meets mass movements is a complicated one. Governments
      have learned that a crisis-driven media cannot afford to hang about
      in the same place for too long. Like a business needs cash turnover,
      the media need crises turnover. Whole countries become old news. They
      cease to exist, and the darkness becomes deeper than before the light
      was briefly shone on them. We saw it happen in Afghanistan when the
      Soviets withdrew. And now, after Operation Enduring Freedom put the
      CIA's Hamid Karzai in place, Afghanistan has been thrown to its
      warlords once more. Another CIA operative, Iyad Allawi, has been
      installed in Iraq, so perhaps it's time for the media to move on from
      there, too. While governments hone the art of waiting out crises,
      resistance movements are increasingly being ensnared in a vortex of
      crisis production, seeking to find ways of manufacturing them in
      easily consumable, spectator-friendly formats. Every self-respecting
      people's movement, every "issue," is expected to have its own hot air
      balloon in the sky advertising its brand and purpose. For this
      reason, starvation deaths are more effective advertisements for
      impoverishment than millions of malnourished people, who don't quite
      make the cut. Dams are not newsworthy until the devastation they
      wreak makes good television. (And by then, it's too late.)

      Standing in the rising water of a reservoir for days on end, watching
      your home and belongings float away to protest against a big dam used
      to be an effective strategy, but isn't any more. The media is dead
      bored of that one. So the hundreds of thousands of people being
      displaced by dams are expected to either conjure new tricks or give
      up the struggle. Resistance as spectacle, as political theatre, has
      a history. Gandhi's salt march in 1931 to Dandi is among the most
      exhilarating examples. But the salt march wasn't theatre alone. It
      was the symbolic part of a larger act of real civil disobedience.
      When Gandhi and an army of freedom fighters marched to Gujarat's
      coast and made salt from seawater, thousands of Indians across the
      country began to make their own salt, openly defying imperial
      Britain's salt tax laws, which banned local salt production in favour
      of British salt imports. It was a direct strike at the economic
      underpinning of the British Empire.

      The disturbing thing nowadays is that resistance as spectacle has cut
      loose from its origins in genuine civil disobedience and is beginning
      to become more symbolic than real. Colourful demonstrations and
      weekend marches are vital but alone are not powerful enough to stop
      wars. Wars will be stopped only when soldiers refuse to fight, when
      workers refuse to load weapons onto ships and aircraft, when people
      boycott the economic outposts of Empire that are strung across the
      globe. If we want to reclaim the space for civil disobedience, we
      will have to liberate ourselves from the tyranny of crisis reportage
      and its fear of the mundane. We have to use our experience, our
      imagination, and our art to interrogate those instruments of state
      that ensure that "normality" remains what it is: cruel, unjust,
      unacceptable. We have to expose the policies and processes that make
      ordinary things - food, water, shelter and dignity - such a distant
      dream for ordinary people. The real pre-emptive strike is to
      understand that wars are the end result of a flawed and unjust peace.

      Š A second hazard facing mass movements is the NGO-isation of
      resistance. It will be easy to twist what I'm about to say into an
      indictment of all NGOs. That would be a falsehood. In the murky
      waters of fake NGOs set up to siphon off grant money or as tax
      dodgesŠ of course there are NGOs doing valuable work. But it's
      important to turn our attention away from the positive work being
      done by some individual NGOs, and consider the NGO phenomenon in a
      broader political context. In India, for instance, the funded NGO
      boom began in the late 1980s and 1990s. It coincided with the opening
      of India's markets to neoliberalism. At the time, the Indian state,
      in keeping with the requirements of structural adjustment, was
      withdrawing funding from rural development, agriculture, energy,
      transport, and public health. As the state abdicated its traditional
      role, NGOs moved in to work in these very areas. The difference, of
      course, is that the funds available to them are a minuscule fraction
      of the actual cut in public spending. Most large well-funded NGOs are
      financed and patronised by aid and development agencies, which are in
      turn funded by Western governments, the World Bank, the U.N., and
      some multinational corporations. Though they may not be the very same
      agencies, they are certainly part of the same loose, political
      formation that oversees the neoliberal project and demands the slash
      in government spending in the first place. Why should these
      agencies fund NGOs? Could it be just old-fashioned missionary zeal?
      Guilt? It's a little more than that.

      NGOs give the impression that they are filling the vacuum created by
      a retreating state. And they are, but in a materially inconsequential
      way. Their real contribution is that they defuse political anger and
      dole out as aid or benevolence what people ought to have by right.
      They alter the public psyche. They turn people into dependent victims
      and blunt the edges of political resistance. NGOs form a sort of
      buffer between the sarkar and public. Between Empire and its
      subjects. They have become the arbitrators, the interpreters, the
      facilitators of the discourse. They play out the role of the
      "reasonable man" in an unfair, unreasonable war. In the long run,
      NGOs are accountable to their funders, not to the people they work
      among. They're what botanists would call an indicator species. It's
      almost as though the greater the devastation caused by neoliberalism,
      the greater the outbreak of NGOs. Nothing illustrates this more
      poignantly than the phenomenon of the U.S. preparing to invade a
      country and simultaneously readying NGOs to go in and clean up the

      ŠApolitical (and therefore, actually, extremely political) distress
      reports from poor countries and war zones eventually make the (dark)
      people of those (dark) countries seem like pathological victims.
      Another malnourished Indian, another starving Ethiopian, another
      Afghan refugee camp, another maimed Sudanese... in need of the white
      man's help. They unwittingly reinforce racist stereotypes and
      re-affirm the achievements, the comforts, and the compassion (the
      tough love) of Western civilisation, minus the guilt of the history
      of genocide, colonialism, and slavery. They're the secular
      missionaries of the modern world. ŠThe NGO-isation of politics
      threatens to turn resistance into a well-mannered, reasonable,
      salaried, 9-to-5 job. With a few perks thrown in. Real resistance
      has real consequences. And no salary.

      This brings us to a third danger I want to speak about tonight: the
      deadly nature of the actual confrontation between resistance
      movements and increasingly repressive states. Between public power
      and the agents of Empire. Whenever civil resistance has shown the
      slightest signs of evolving from symbolic action into anything
      remotely threatening, the crackdown is merciless. We've seen what
      happened in the demonstrations in Seattle, in Miami, in Gothenburg,
      in Genoa. In the United States, you have the USA PATRIOT Act, which
      has become a blueprint for anti-terrorism laws passed by governments
      around the world. Freedoms are being curbed in the name of protecting
      freedom. And once we surrender our freedoms, to win them back will
      take a revolution. Some governments have vast experience in the
      business of curbing freedoms and still smelling sweet. The government
      of India, an old hand at the game, lights the path. Over the years
      the Indian government has passed a plethora of laws that allow it to
      call almost anyone a terrorist, an insurgent, a militant. We have the
      Armed Forces Special Powers Act, the Public Security Act, the Special
      Areas Security Act, the Gangster Act, the Terrorist and Disruptive
      Activities (Prevention) Act (which has formally lapsed, but under
      which people are still facing trial), and, most recently, POTA (the
      Prevention of Terrorism Act), the broad-spectrum antibiotic for the
      disease of dissent.

      There are other steps that are being taken, such as court judgments
      that in effect curtail free speech, the right of government workers
      to go on strike, the right to life and livelihood. Courts have begun
      to micro-manage our lives in India. And criticising the courts is a
      criminal offence. In this restive, despairing time, if governments
      do not do all they can to honour nonviolent resistance, then by
      default they privilege those who turn to violence. No government's
      condemnation of terrorism is credible if it cannot show itself to be
      open to change by nonviolent dissent. But instead nonviolent
      resistance movements are being crushed. Any kind of mass political
      mobilisation or organisation is being bought off, broken, or simply

      Meanwhile, governments and the corporate media, and let's not forget
      the film industry, lavish their time, attention, funds, technology,
      research, and admiration on war and terrorism. Violence has been
      deified. The message this sends is disturbing and dangerous: If you
      seek to air a public grievance, violence is more effective than
      nonviolence. As the rift between the rich and poor grows, as the
      need to appropriate and control the world's resources to feed the
      great capitalist machine becomes more urgent, the unrest will only

      © 2004 Arundhati Roy is the author of the novel, The God of Small
      Things, for which she was awarded the Booker Prize in 1997. She has
      also published four essay collections: An Ordinary Person's Guide to
      Empire, War Talk, Power Politics, and The Cost of LivingŠTrained as
      an architect, Roy lives in New Delhi, India.


      Send all sound material for airplay and review to:
      Wreck This MeSS
      Radio 100 / Radio Patapoe
      bart plantenga
      Zeilstraat 23 / II
      1075 SB Amsterdam
      the Netherlands

      o "plus another few hundred when it hits the BSI list!" Ezra
      o Old playlists archived at <http://www.wfmu.org/~bart/
      o Selected Playlists at http://www.romanapoli.com/black/wreckthismess.html
      o On hold: <http://wreckthismess.com/>
      o Check out excerpts from my erotic-dérive novel: Paris Sex Tete on
      Parisiana <http://www.parisiana.com/> with help from editor einar
      moos and eddie du bois


      CONTACT ninplant@... FOR REMOVAL

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.