On Tue, 2 Feb 1999 [email protected] wrote:
> Certainly, I am not a anarch. I am an observer of the anarch - from
> a bourgeoise position. And I would like to be one of its "painters".
> I mean, in the chessgame:-)
I've tried to be an anarch and by that I consider myself one and would
like to take a chair near you :).
> ... an anarch would likely not reveal this to the world,
> > regardless of the real value or harmlessness of the practice. Why take any
> > chances when you never know who is listening or how society may change?
>
> Bad movement:-). The anarch offers information in certain groups,
> and when he decides- he believes in litle circles, see Eumeswill.
> The anarch analize pragamatically the situations. talking about
> THC is not dangerous anymore. More over, could be a funny,
> popular detail of an autobiography:-). Modern anarch should take
> account medias and publicity are including in the camouflage:-).
> This is an example of two movements of the game.
I think anarch can take media in account but not to promote it's views
due to the unpredictability (wrong spelling?) of the audience. He can be
a part of it but not taking part in the information it uses (confuse?).
> The game basis are simply. a: try do build the board- perhaps in a
> noveled way. Draw the figures: anarch, bourgeoise, worker,
> waldwanger, put them in "our everyday world". Place the enclosing
> frame, the laws and the limits.
> b: once built, put the "figures" in
> action.
> c: try to do best, but with fair
> play.
> D: l´art pour l´art
Sorry to be not completely familiar with the workers figure as drwan by
Junger but about the suicidary pieces like revolutionaries and such?
best regards,
Ricardo Reis
"NON SERVIAM"
