Anonymous Comrade writes:

"Fall of the American Empire"

I found myself facinated by C-Span's coverage of the Senate today. A HUGE bill hit the desks of Congress and the Senate this weekend. Actually, the Omnibus Appropiations Bill is over 3000 pages filled with varied legislation of all kinds that requires just one vote, yes or no. It includes everything from funding for charities that sound strangely like Bush supporters to appropriating money for education, cops and all those important community services. As some of you are aware, this is a political ploy to sneak through laws hoping no one will notice or forcing them through along with the necessary laws. In fact the Congress has already passed this bill and sent it to the Senate urging them to pass it right away so they could adjourn for the holidays.

Funny thing....somebody DID notice that included, or should I say, slipped in at the last minute, was something called "Provision 222" This little ditty would allow the govt...read carefully...to assign an agent of their choice (anyone) to have access to any citizens tax returns, make them public and use the information against them, (ex: in a political campaign) and NOT HAVE TO PAY ANY PENALTY OR BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE for this disclosure.

This law would SUPERCEDE any previous laws on our rights to privacy. On top of this outrage, the government would have access to all personal records, political associations, charitable donations and just about everything we do including the internet. I heard words like, "Big Brother", "Soviet Union" "Stripping citizens of their right to privacy" coming from our senators. If you hear about this not passing it is because of the few sane senators that voted against passing this ridiculous provision included in the massive Omnibus bill. If it does pass....be afraid, be very afraid.

"The Criminal Bee"

Hakim Bey

Nietzsche says somewhere that the true, free spirit wil not wish to see the laws of the herd abolished, lest there exist nothing to struggle against and overcome. Litle danger of such an abolishment at this point, one might suppose.

Since Nietzsche's time law has perhaps mutated from a complex but many-dimensional tool of the oppresor class to the subtle, fratal, all-pervasive self-image of the spectacle. Law simulates the dictatorship of community, forever promising & forever withdrawing the utopia of justice.

Our founding myths here in America, which take the form of such texts as a declaration of independence or a bill of rights etc. prove so infinitely flexible as to become, like all myths, their opposites. The law no longer seems like a dialctical edge, as it was for Nietzsche, but rather a viral ooze, infecting the very fabric of language & thought.

"Evolution and Revolution"

Elisée Reclus

These two words, Evolution and Revolution, closely resemble one another, and yet they are constantly used in their social and political sense as though their meaning were absolutely antagonistic.  The word Evolution, synonymous with gradual and continuous development in morals and ideas, is brought forward in certain circles as though it were the antithesis of that fearful word, Revolution, which implies changes more or less sudden in their action, and entailing some sort of catastrophe.  And yet is it possible that a transformation can take place in ideas without bringing about some abrupt displacements in the equilibrium of life?  Must not revolution necessarily follow evolution, as action follows the desire to act?  They are fundamentally one and the same thing, differing only according to the time of their appearance.  If, on the one hand, we believe in the normal progress of ideas, and, on the other, expect opposition, then, of necessity, we believe in external shocks that change the form of society. 

"The Pot Thickens"

Dean Kuipers, Los Angeles CityBeat

Drug policy reform activist Rob Kampia explains why the election was a breakthrough for marijuana legalization.

If President George W. Bush's squeaky reelection is supposed to be a mandate on conservative moral values, how do you explain that 17 out of 20 pro-marijuana initiatives on ballots nationwide were approved?

For instance, look at Montana: Energized evangelical voters in this pro-Bush state led a charge that amended their state constitution to make gay marriage illegal, but they also approved of medical marijuana by a massive 62 to 38 percent. The churches obviously didn't mobilize against pot like White House Drug Czar John Walters urged them to do. In fact, this election may be the breakthrough on marijuana legalization in general: Conservatives nationwide came out in favor of pot as medicine.