#immediatism

[jonasgoonface]

image description: two horny cyberpunks are all wrapped up in eachother. the tiny caption states: The story that progress is a forgone conclusion validates the current systems of oppression and contradicts the truth of our circumstances. Progress is a death march - if you submit to the future you are dead to the present.

[m3l0dy-p]

How do people build up, like, ANY skills? How do people have the passion and drive to slodge through hours of failure just to get to a kinda good result? How do people actually enjoy "THE PROCESS" ?

[walt-thisney]

Crass – Normal Never Was - Remixes

WHALTHISNEY remixed " Feeding of the 5000 " from the band Crass ( oficial )

[thehierophage]

Immediatism

Initially broadcast as a Radio Sermonette for the Moorish Orthodox Radio Crusade on WBAI in 1991, then published as a collection both as a zine from the Libertarian Book Club in 1992 and as a paperback called “Immediatism and Other Essays” (1996). The following was published in the God/Dog issue of the Moorish Science Monitor, Vol. V, #2 (Spring 1991) i. All experience is mediated—by the…

View On WordPress

[monohedron]

[trvvllknvs]

[trvvllknvs]

[sethdrayer-blog]

Immediatists in the pro-life movement must answer the question Gregg Cunningham posed to T. Russell Hunter in last weekend's debate.

GC: I’d like to return to the question with which I began, which Russ hasn’t answered. Should we allow these babies to die rather than enact incremental legislation?

TH: No.

GC: I’m sorry?

TH: Like, should we allow – should we allow babies to die?

GC: Should we allow these – because…

TH: The charade is – the charade is not even what we’re talking about – the incrementalism/immediatism debate. Focusing the ax at the tree, getting all the people who follow incrementalism to become immediatists and help put that ax to the branch – to the root…

GC: Would you answer this question?

TH: [unintelligible]

Moderator: That was the last question. Russ, go ahead and answer that, and then we’re gonna end this.

GC: Just for the record, Russ didn’t answer the question: Should we have allowed these babies to die, which this university professor says would have died had that legislation not been enacted. Should we have allowed them to die rather than enact the incremental legislation?

Moderator: Ok, Russ, answer that question, then we’ll change.

TH: Um, well, I firmly believe that abortion is evil, and it is one of these things that the powers and principalities of darkness and high places are very in to. It’s the crown jewel of darkness, and I actually believe that if they can keep abortion going by deceiving people into becoming gradualists, they will do it. And if to deceive them they have to give them empty, illusory victories, and law professors may claim that babies were saved, they’ll do it. But I – if someone goes to an abortion mill and shoots a doctor, a baby might be saved that day, but that’s not going towards abolishing abortion. It’s not establishing justice that day [unintelligible] a baby that day.

GC: May I ask for clarification for your answer? You’re saying this guy’s making this up?

TH: Uh, no, I have to read it. But I’m just saying that convincing people to be gradualists by saying, “Hey look, we saved some,” while they’re still being – I’m pretty sure that you can convince people to be gradualists for the next 40 years…

GC: Hey Russell, let’s do both. Let’s do both. Let’s do both.