The Authority Smashing! Hour


8/11/2009 The Authority Smashing! Hour

anarcho-heartThe Authority Smashing! Hour with Buddhagem and Mr1001Nights, with Chomskyan

12 comments on “8/11/2009 The Authority Smashing! Hour

  1. Tyler
    August 12, 2009

    Hey guys. Glad to hear the documentary is almost finished. This is not really got to do with the show, but perhaps it would be nice to talk about it in your next show. In Guelph, Ontario, Canada (where I live) a group of activists (a few of which are anarchists) are occupying Guelph’s Old Growth Forest, to halt its development into the “Hanlon Creek Business Park.” The protesters began their occupation on July 27, 2009, forcing Drexler, the construction company, to remove their equipment. The protesters remain until this day. The City of Guelph, which owns the land has repeatedly tried to file an injunction, but after two Superior Court trials, one last week, and the other last Monday, the court would not issue the injunction to remove the protesters. These favorable rulings (for the protesters) are unprecedented for what seems to be a straight forward, open and shut private property tresspassing case.

    Many local residents are on the side of the protesters, who have been under the threat of being removed by police. As of now the city has no legal authority to remove the protesters. In the last court trial (which I attended) the judge did not rule in favor of the city filing an injunction, but demanded that any obstructions to city vehicles (such as trenches and barricades) have to be taken down.

    I visited the site yesterday and they were not taken down.

    Other conditions imposed on the protesters was limiting the number of people that could be on the camp to 30 (on day 1 there were 60 people) and those thirty had to have been on the site for 24 hours. The fear this put into the protesters was considerable enough for them to ask me to leave the site one night. Another rule is that they are not allowed to climb their log watch tower (which they used to detect police). Police helicopters on the other hand, have flown over the site with impunity. It’s like the police are allowed to watch the protesters but not the other way around.

    The protesters are defending one of Ontario’s last Old Growth Forests, that contains an endangered Salamander, and some 500 year old trees. I just think it is amazing how long they have been keeping it up. There’s a lot of other information I could cram in but I’ll just give you their website:

    • Tyler
      August 12, 2009

      This has been front page news for days.

    • power2theplankton
      August 14, 2009

      No way! You are in Guelph? I did my undergrad in Guelph, 2000 – 2004, and loved that city. I lived on Cork and Glasgow. I also love the activism in Guelph. I had a lot of fun participating in protests, hi-jinx, and the lively discussions of politics and anarchism on the campus. Glad to hear that activism is still going. Ah to think I live in Phoenix now… how far I have strayed from the ideal.

  2. Tyler
    August 12, 2009

    Food Not Bombs being white supremacist. LOL. I have a friend in that organization. He’s white. Oh well.

  3. Tyler
    August 12, 2009


    i used to live in a restaurant.

    only cost my Mom $3000/a month.

    if you squat, make sure you don’t have an injunction filed against you.

  4. Tyler
    August 12, 2009

    your talk about destroying useful things reminds me of what I described in Guelph above. The business park they are planning could be built on other lands. What they are planning to build is like biotech and agribusiness industries which the city calls “environmentally friendly” in spite of the fact they are destroying one of the last old growth forests, in opposition to the will of the residents in the nearby community.

  5. Tyler
    August 12, 2009

    in scandinavia, i read that the employers are unionized.

  6. Tyler
    August 12, 2009

    bill clinton is coming to toronto. the taxpayers (in Canada) are paying for the event. the tickets are selling between $20-$50 even though the taxpayers are still paying for it.

    My Dad wants to go. LOL.

  7. abortabraham
    August 13, 2009

    I think stodles nailed it in a response, there was always something about Napalmtube. I enjoyed his videos, but something just wasn’t quite there. It wasn’t enough to address him, but I always felt it as an undertone. His later videos reflected it even more. He got to a point of calling himself apolitical, and then he became a Catholic statist. I always question my ideas and preferences, but I feel once you get the point of saying “fuck this”, I HAVE to question how much you really studied your ideas of antistatism on a real, historical level. I don’t think its possible for me to become a statist ever again (as if I ever was a “state supporter”). I embrace some right libertarian ideas and facets of Austrian economics, its more or less common sense, but I recognize the function of capital accumulation, propertarianism, and the hierarchy that spawns from those things. All of that comes after you analyze both sides on a realistic, logistical level. But once you’ve decided that you are in love with objective truths and laws, nevermind the man in the sky, and believe in a state, that pretty much means you want the state to be the objective law-giver. Big mistake, and its the equivalent to throwing countless hours of thought out the window for Paleocrat’s simplistic view of (as napalmtube once deemed his excuse) “over 9000 god did its”. If you truly had that much invested in antistatism alone, you would not be swayed by Paleocrat’s sanctimonious state apologetics. Its not Paleocrat’s fault, but that doesn’t excuse his constant disinformation. This whole thing is like a car accident, and just as unfortunate IMO.

  8. CaptainFrantic
    August 15, 2009

    With the huge debate going on over there in the US at the moment about nationalised healthcare and some of the extreme bullshit that is being spread about our NHS I’d like to hear you guys talk about this issue. The NHS saved my life back in 2001 after a (rather horrific) attempt on my life, however, I recognise that for it (or any nationalised healthcare system) to exist, it seems to me that you would *have* to have a government to collect the taxes to pay for it and also to legislate and facilitate it’s function. Quite the problem yes? I have a hard time imagining how a “free” healthcare system could exist in an anarchist society and would love to hear an argument which states that it’s possible.

  9. Tyler
    August 15, 2009

    The health care system in Canada saved my mother’s life too. I think it would be dangerous to dismantle the health care system tomorrow since so many people are dependent on it. If you want to know what an “anarchist society” would be like, I suggest taking a look at the Spanish Revolution. It is my understanding that the anarchists took over the hotels and turned them into well-functioning hospitals. Were they perfect? Probably not. But it certainly is possible to take care of the sick without resorting to hierarchy. There are no formulas. I’m sure if we got rid of the health care system in Canada, a lot of people would get very sick.

    I think it would be a good idea to have a public health care system in the United States simply because it would get people medical care. Even though it would still be hierarchically run, under the circumstances I think it’s justifiable.

    • power2theplankton
      August 15, 2009

      I would gladly volunteer a portion of my income to put into a community pot that would go towards infrastructure development, health care, and any other important aspects of living in a society. Precapitalist societies and even many communities still thriving today know about this, they pool their money to pay for things that will benefit the community at large. Its not a government tax, but a pooling of resources during good times to ensure that all can make it through bad times. It’s like insurance, but nobody makes a profit from it. The problem with government run health care is that there is a large separation between those putting money into the pot, and those managing the programs. So now the people who put money into a pot (through taxation) to ensure health care services do not have a say in the decision making. This is the Canadian health care system basically. Yet it is far superior to the American system because regardless of some mismanagement, everybody has access to health care (we don’t euthanize old people). That means when they are sick they can get treatment, and get back to work (to make profits for their companies), and continue to contribute to the pot. Also given the current mantra of market competition, and if we were to just take that at face value, I cannot understand how competition could occur when you have healthy people competing against sick people (and people without access to education too). To me it seems to make sense for a “healthy” capitalist system, just as it makes sense in social democracy, and certainly for anarchism. The difference is, in an anarchist system we would have greater say in the decision making process in regards to how our voluntary pooled money is used. That is of course, if we decide to pool our money, but I would assume that people would at least want to manage risks communally, as many societies have in the past.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s


This entry was posted on August 11, 2009 by in The ASH.
<span>%d</span> bloggers like this: