Quote from: Phenol on May 25, 2023, 11:19:15 AM
Two very interesting reads. Can you elaborate on how the lefty guy got industrial imagery and tactics wrong? Not disagreeing with you, just think there's an interesting conversation there.
Not question directed to me, but as its public forum, I may say that perhaps, what he "got wrong" is sort of firm political stand. To give example. Not long ago, for the usual reasons, there was Finnish language discussion going on under title of "fascism & noise scene". Despite title could suggest opportunity to observe how does fascism appear in noise scene, what are the vast ideological differences, aesthetics, reasons, motivations with both: artists flirting with fascism and artists who might be legitimate fascists of some sort. It could allow to observe historical significance, or lack of it. And many many more ways to approach the topic. However, if you got certain types of people talking, the only way that it is being talked is (and.. can be?)
who are the fascist, and how we could throw them out of our noise community.This formerly linked article is certainly way way way more advanced observation. Regardless of that, author is so firmly rooted in his political standpoint, that he is unable to accept artists approach. Nor he appears to have interest in detail beyond level of how it enable to make these political conclusions.
Lets say, namedropping AWB label is curious in this article. Some may remember their infamous full page advertisement in rather big circulation industrial magazine, with "To suit variety of tastes, AWB recording artists are RACISTS, OCCULTISTS & SADISTS. Under the caps-on words you'll find Terre Blanche (racists), Sigillum S (occultists) and Intrinsic Action (sadists) 7"s being promoted. Advertisement appears like the exploitation paper back of mens adventure stories.
Of course we can simply conclude that fuck these racists or racism normalizers. For me, more interesting could be to dig deeper, regardless can clear answers be found at all. You could wonder why TB had zero antisemitic qualities, while that being quite dominating quality in USA racial industrial? Heated rants of personal experienced in old interview or such could be curious reading. Wonder what is the differences of Control Resistance, Brehren, assorted Warcom projects, Blood Axis, NON or whatever.
I'd reduce just into couple points:
-From perspective of industrial culture, like clearly expressed by both artists and author of that linked text, one of major points is to enable people think without (or at least will less) conditioned responses. Author of text argues that such notion fails to acknowledge perhaps legitimate causes that conditioned the reaction. Arguing that guy who has NF carved to his door with knife and burning rags inserted into mailbox he got reason for conditioned response against nazis and doesn't need to analyse mild differences. Sure. Would be curious to ask if his logic is valid also when someone had same experience with bunch of... lets just say bad experiences with
other type of people?
-From perspective of industrial culture, it feels strange if kind of moralist standpoint or clarity is demanded. Author may be firmly political, who hopes things making sense and to have clear direction according to consensus of time and place where he was writing this. Fine, but thinking that such qualities must be agreed by the others as well is the odd part. Industrial culture may enable one to look into even personally difficult things from new perspectives. It may also be subversive in ways that really creeps out people. It also creeps out, because they got real concern what is people don't "get it" in a way he does. What if people aren't liberal or leaning to values you personally feel are right?
One hot topic may be question of violence. Like Grey Wolves mentions in letter published in the article, violence is true revolutionary act. Well, not on those exact words, but instead of ambiguity, pretty clearly declaring violence as a legitimate weapon of change. One of most crucial elements of sovereign state, is that violence is state monopoly. It is the core quality of society or existing state, that rights to use violence is monopoly of state authority. Insisting or glorifying pacifism of person (or art) in my eyes is odd. What is someone can understand specific artists work endorsement of violence? What type of violence? How and what to think of violence - perhaps one can ponder while listening some good album of The Grey Wolves? It may be different emotion, that to do it while listening Taint.
