Further “Where the Hell is SKZB” Updates

14 thoughts on “Further “Where the Hell is SKZB” Updates”

1. Llamas are only good at the “tearing down” part of home renovations, as anyone who has watched “Llamas with Hats” can attest.

2. True, true. I loved Llamas with Hats.

3. ^
   | That. Just. . . that.

   However, on a serious note, ‘what kids are talking about these days’ are: The recent social tensions created firstly by the government shutdown and secondly by the possibly imminent ‘economic shutdown’ due to a failure to raise the debt ceiling; the correlating rise in shooting incidents in recent times , including the one that happened today; and how these might be signs that a Workers Revolt is getting closer. If not Close, maybe substantially Closer.

   Correlation does not -guarantee- causation, I know. But it’s certainly implying it, at least enough that there needs to be some discussion to find if there is a relationship there somewhere and what it might mean.

   Maybe I watch too many disaster movies, and maybe I get a bit too excited about radical social movements, and maybe they’re coming together. But hypothetically, if that particular social development were to happen in the near future, Steve, what could a person be active about, or similarly negligent of, to support or hinder it, respectively? Or, to make a pun, “What would Oskar do?”

   I ask so vaguely because, while I was once sure how I would respond to such a situation, I’m not anymore. I finally landed a solid job, and my labor-of-love book is almost finished, and I’m realizing that I’m nineteen and in my prime and happy. Suddenly I’m not so sure about the socioeconomic ideas that sounded oh-so-right a while ago when I read them on this blog, and, to some extent, in your books. Sometimes hypocrisy comes up and bites me in the ass. :/

   I thought you might have some ideas about this subject. I love your books, and particularly The Incrementalists. Hope the book tour goes well for you and Skyler.

4. It’s hard to imagine the answer to “what would Oskar do?” being something other than “organizing”.

5. So the first step in organizing would be what? Someone taking a stab at leading the cause of ‘this system doesn’t work and here’s a solution that is fair’? That’s a good way to rally people, I think, if someone -would- take that stab and manage to reach a lot of people with it.

6. I suspect what we’re seeing is the slow forging of class conscioiusness, which can become rapid and explosive with no warning, or may still take time to develop, depending on how things play out.

   I think a combination of organizing and education. At this stage, organizing has to, I think, be limited to the most class-conscious workers; probably small in number still. I would start here: wsws.org for an organization and analysis of current events. For reading, probably The Communist Manifesto is a good place to start.

7. While poking around at wsws.org, take a look at the evolution of the campaign to defend Detroit Institute of Arts. Information first about the proposal to sell off this magnificent art collection; who is behind the campaign, what it means. Then mobilization of responses (often quite eloquent), from artists of all sorts, students, workers, the unemployed. Then,today, a demonstration to feed further mobilization and education. A remarkable process.

   I would also advise checking out the section “Why I read the wsws” launched on the 15th anniversary of the web site for a truly awesome view of the impact that this website has had on the working class world-wide. Sometimes the steps seem incremental, but the result can be….

8. Well said, Cynthia. Perfect example.

9. I first read that as “Eating a book in a day”.

10. Great to see you in Austin tonight, Mr. Brust. Good luck to you and Skyler with the rest of the rock star signing tour!

11. Thanks Steve, Chaos, and Cynthia for responding. The WSWS is helping to piece together the current cultural landscape for me. Thanks. :)

    I found this interview and it seemed relevant:

    “There was a lot of repression. [The Occupy Movement] was a movement that was systematically torn apart. . . . It was not only brute force; in meeting after meeting after meeting there were clear infiltrators who were disrupting the discussions and making sure that no sustainable organizing practices could take hold.”

    – Nathan Schneider in this interview: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HV98x84qFBA&feature=youtube_gdata_player

    Lastly, I don’t mean to hijack the stream. So should I shut up about this and take it somewhere more appropriate? And if so, where would that be? Don’t want to dirty with my comments the otherwise happy experience that is The Incrementalists book tour. :)

    If you see this, Skyler, the post on Facebook about appearing in The Wall Street Journal was very moving.

12. I dunno, feel free to keep talking about it. It’s strangely appropriate. But I’m still traveling and won’t have a lot of time to respond.

13. Thanks for being cool about it, Steve. No problem with the lack of response. Despite the effects of the internet, I have made it a point with myself to -not- require instant gratification the way most of my peers do. Whenever you’ve got time, a month from now maybe, think some of this over. :)

    I’ve been thinking about it a lot. I also recently stumbled upon a section of Wikipedia related to philosophy. Here’s the result of that merger, which I originally posted on my Tumblr where no one will see it. :D

    “The foundation of a society and a direct factor in regards to any given civilization’s accomplishments is the ability of the people in it to put their society, e.g. the greater good, before their own personal desires and goals. The primary manifestation of this is the society’s government.

    The decadence of societies, when public works turn from great in scope to mundane and maintenance-based, occurs with the individualism of people overcoming the cooperation that makes the government function. This happens when the law, an aspect of the government meant to ensure that no one can act contrary to the people’s best interest, breaks down.

    The Constitution of the United States considered the government as an entity that should be regulated and restrained in much the same way as people are. Its purpose was to assure the people that the government’s best interests are, in fact, their best interests.

    The (non-rhetorical) question now is how many people need to be disenfranchised before we realize that the very mechanisms meant to help everyone cooperate and be productive on a grand scale, the law and government, are being exploited by a few rich and powerful people? The system has been bent beyond repair. It’s time for a new system. One that puts it’s philosophy where it’s media is, and its money where it’s people are.”

14. Bother. You’re going to be in Boston for the first time in ages (ever?), and I’m spending my weekend out in the midwest visiting friends. Sorry to miss you, hope the signing goes well.