Crow Falls Down

Persistence

Ask the people who argue that slavery would have withered away if only the noble Confederacy had been left alone why it is that the same process hasn’t happened with regard to the pervasive culture of rape and violence against women? To the treatment of children as property of their parents? To the prison system and the drug war? To the accumulation of wealth and the centralization of power?

How is it that all the hierarchies and systems of oppression persist when they aren’t actively dismantled and fought, but slavery would have gone the way of the dodo?

If you call yourself a socialist, an anarchist, a communist, or align yourself in any way with what is colloquially known as “the left,” you do not defend pornography.

American libertarians defend porn, because libertarians are okay with the selling off of human bodies. Liberals defend pornography because they fetishize “free speech” in much the same way as conservatives fetishize guns: like assault rifles, “free speech” provides an illusion of autonomy, of independence from the capitalist state economy which deigns, from time to time, to allow its more loyal doyens the anodyne of permissiveness.

Pornography can only be fascist, because pornography captures bodies in a state of absolute subjection to the paymaster. There is no free speech in the production of pornography. It is bodies reduced to puppets, managed by an administrator working for a capitalist who pays his dues to the corporate state in order to obtain protection from the very bodies he manipulates.

There is no consent in porn, because the relationship which produces it is hierarchical: laborers sell their very persons, and are subject to treatment as mannikins to be positioned for the mediated consumption by customers who either by direct fee, or through advertising revenue, generate concentrated wealth for the owner.

If you accept as fundamentally true that human liberty and the full flourishing of human experience depend upon the abolition of the state, the seizure of the means of production, and the end of capitalism, you are and must be an enemy of its most naked insult against the human person, pornography.

The Placebo Effect of Law

There is no law or institution written or crafted for the alleged emolument of the poor which cannot, and therefore will not, be turned to the advantage of the rich.

One could even reasonably argue that there is no law crafted for the poor, ever. Any advantages to the poor are akin to the placebo effect in medicine.

Those with power use that power to keep their power, and to expand it. The state is always a product of the ruling class, always the expression of its collective desire, and its outcomes the consequence of their machinations.

Any law or institution marketed as an improvement for the poor or laboring classes of a necessity must be seen through the lens of those who created it. If it improves the lot of their inferiors, it improves the lot of ruling class even more.

Austerity: First Discontents

The Tea Party, which is neither revolutionary nor anti-imperial as its symbolic name might suggest, represents the death rattle of the middle and managerial class which, because of demographic shifts towards the city and the diminished need for professionals who operate independent of corporate networks, is being shifted into the proletariat. Austerity actually hurts them first, since the middle class trapped in the exurbs and suburbs is the largest single beneficiary of the redistribution of wealth doing business as state/municipal roads, schools, courts, police and infrastructure. And while they are austerity’s biggest advocates, they will be its first casualty. When the austerity program has run its course, the segments of the middle class which are not directly tied into corporate networks will no longer exist, and there won’t be the same need for the “defensive patriotism” of the small holders.And it will no longer be a middle class.

Opponents of austerity often bill their resistance as a defense of the poor, but the facts on the ground suggest that austerity’s primary target is a middle class which exists somewhat within its own bubble of kith, kirche and kin. Austerity savages the institutional supports for a managerial and professional class which was created by the state, served to produce laborers and employees for the ruling class which governs that state, and which protected their interests.

The poor, to quote an imaginary folk hero, will be here for the long run. They are manageable with violence, incarceration and repression, because their conditions expose them directly to the the brutality of markets and enforcers, without any of the mediation and amelioration up to this point provided by the capitalist market state.

With austerity, we see the beginning of proletarianization. With austerity, we will also see the confusion that comes from people trained to see the world as managers, professionals and educated clerks frustrated into agitation and even resistance. But, as happened in Europe and Asia in the last century, they will make a farce of that resistance, because they lack the nakedness of exposure to capitalism’s full degradation. They will mystify, to use an old but still useful term, their resistance as a return to old, enlightened norms.

There is no more conservative class than the middle one, especially when its individual members see themselves as liberal. They believe they’ve achieved the proper and even final condition of man, and their proletarianization will be accompanied by managerial, educated and professional attempts to seize and govern resistance to those everyday depravities as a recreation of their need to restore their former place in the world.

This will happen.

It is not preventable.

But, those who care to do so can prepare for it, by having in place working class resistances, affinities, unions, mutual aid societies, care groups, child care collectives, training cadres, commissaries, and the like.

High Achievement

Would anyone care about Aaron Swartz’s flight into corporeal oblivion if he was not the son of a white businessman, if he was not a “prodigy” and a golden child attending a prestigious elite university which itself exists to funnel high achievers into government, academia and the corporate world, where they will trade on an artificially scarce skill set while capturing wealth for those who lord over the rest of us?

Isn’t the essential back story here that he was a young man who’s been cast in the role of hero posthumously for doing nothing more than violating the minor expectation that, being upper class, he’d act like a dickish member of the ruling class all of the time?

And yet, that is why he is valorized and lionized by academics, so-called radicals and the rest of the middle and upper class white world which hadn’t heard of him until he’d done spectacularly what rich kids do ordinarily. He checked out, and left other people to clean up his mess and make excuses for his actions.

His revolutionary act? Making academic papers available to the kind of people who can afford them in the first place.

Hacking a pay wall. Can’t you just feel your groceries bills getting smaller already?

“Information will be free” is the mantra of people who don’t have to worry about the cops, doctors’ costs and hunger every single day. It’s the kind of slogan you can expect from people who take a computer, an automobile and a college degree for granted. Its validity as a principle exists in direct proportion to the height one occupies in a social hierarchy.

For most of us, everything costs. All of it. All of the fucking time. Free stuff isn’t revolutionary. It’s unreliable good luck. It’s what happens when the rich get lazy and bored and want to prove to each other that all that money makes them special. You don’t count on it, because you can never count on the wealthy to keep their end of any bargain. They’re rich because they learned how to live with using others as tools, how to betray and call it an economy - or they learned to live with inheriting that stolen labor as privilege and property.

So what if his name wasn’t Aaron Swartz, but was instead something vaguely black sounding, like Vontaze Washington? What if he hadn’t “liberated” a bunch of data that only matters to academics, white people with free time and Lawrence Lessig, but had instead come out of an underfunded public school, in a neighborhood where the cops and the bureaucrats start off assuming that your melanin per square inch exists in a causal relationship to your capacity for intelligence and moral value? What if, facing no chance of gainful and steady employment, he began to supplement his meager income by going into time debt to the crushing tyranny that is an illicit drug distribution pyramid? What if all he could afford to liberate was a few hours each week to help his mother with the laundry and the groceries, and that the almost inevitable outcome of his “choices” was that one day some suburban douchebag was going to give his name to the cops after getting busted at a college party? And while the future business major gets a warning and a “boys will be boys,” young Mr. Washington gets the full penalty of the law?

Or, what if young Mr. Swartz was not Mr. Washington but was instead a young miss Hernandez? What if what she was trying to quietly liberate was her autonomy - not the assumption of it, nor the probability of it as an intellectual exercise, but an autonomy so normal and unquestioned that no man would ever assume that her freedom came at the cost of his needs and labor? What if her act of liberation wasn’t hand waved away at every turn? What if her expected existence was not an endless grind of male possessiveness and weakness masquerading as attraction, a social norm which establishes from the day she is born until the day she’s predictably reduced to a statistic that she owes an explanation and a justification for her every decision, else she’s a whore, a bitch, asking for it, stupid, should have been more careful, had to have given mixed signals, provoked her attacker, tempted her harasser, learned her lesson?

What if?

We wouldn’t know their names. That’s what.

So, what?

Some rich high achiever offing himself after he’s treated like a working class woman, a migrant worker or a black man could only seem astounding to white people, to libertarians and climbers and merit liberals, because the cops, management and the law fucking with their worlds daily is precisely out of the norm. Their everyday is a base line deference, an assumption that they will do good in the world and that the social order exists for their benefit. They depend upon it. It’s the air they breathe. It takes some kind of chutzpah heavy self-absorption - maybe even an “epistemic closure” - to discover in Aaron Swartz’s fate a monumental tragedy.

So that’s Mr. Swartz’s high achievement, as his history is forgotten and his myth commences. He got a bunch of white liberals and libertarians to congratulate themselves over their shared outrage at his bathetic end.