OPPOSE HOMEGROWN TERRORISM PREVENTION ACT

 The goal of H.R. 1955, it would appear after a
cursory look, is to constrain to some degree civil
and environmental activism and social protest. It has
long been a goal of the American right wing to resist
in every conceivable way the culture, values, and
behaviors associated with the labor movements of the
Keynesian era and the social protest movements of the
1960s and 1970s. This is just more of the same. The
activist community is really rather vigilant about
these issues, as evidenced by the efforts of the CCR
here.

Honestly I am not overly worried. I can't imagine
that the reactionary march towards fascism will
persist for much longer. The misadventure in Iraq,
the outsourcing of the domestic production base to
China, and the uncontrollable deficits have caused
the right to lose a lot of steam. The Third Estate
has plenty of reason to realize that its real enemy
is the domestic nobility and clergy, and not
Wahabbis, Moors, and Saracens. So long as we remain
active, thoughtful, and self-aware citizens we can
combat legal encroachments on public power and
restrictions of civil liberties. But we have to be
willing and able to present a serious threat to the
establishment, by whatever means that are
appropriate. And we have to strike whenever the
pendulum swings the right way, seizing upon the
momentum of fluctuating public opinion.

Personally I have been attacking them where they
feel it the most, their pocketbook. I have been
trying to start a socially responsible investment
program here at the university I attend. Its not unreasonable
under the logic of corporatism either. There are
still laws out there, and the way to hedge one's
investments against the legal costs and reputational
risks of doing business irresponsibly is to invest in
a socially, environmentally, and democratically sound
way. I am trying to get the university to let me
manage a portion of its endowments in a manner that
shows respect for a broader awareness of social,
economic, environmental and political consequences.
So far they have been very receptive.

That's the key, really. At least in my opinion.
Disrupt business as usual. Change the calculus of
rational decision-makers by influencing the
parameters. That's what civil disobedience is about.
Though civil disobedience is just one tactic. And it
is a very costly tactic; I know from personal
experience because I am the only one at my university who
every engages in civil disobedience to my knowledge.
The police came by my room last night about 1:00 a.m.
and banged on my door. They said they received a
noise complaint and told me to turn my music down.
Now it was Saturday night and people listen to loud
music and party in their rooms and in the hallway
until 5:00 a.m. sometimes, but it was an unusually
quiet night and I was listening to my music at a
reasonable volume. It could barely be heard in the
hallway outside my door--I checked with the police.
They had their hands on their weapons the entire time
we talked. Maybe it is standard operating procedure
for them to index their weapon systems while
responding to an incident. But I see them plenty of
times with their hands not on their weapons.

I am not worried though. Actually a bit
encouraged. When people begin using state violence to
accomplish their objectives, it means the persuasive
power of their philosophy of operations is on the
decline. If institutions can't market and sell their
ideas and instead have to force them on people, it is
much costlier and riskier to do business. That's what
techniques like H.R. 1955 are about: the
self-awareness of a failing operational apparatus. We
just have to make sure that informational context is
not lost in a sea of informational content, and that
people understand the failures of our society are do
to the weaknesses of the overarching logic of our
times: neoliberalism.

Corporations have been too cavalier in buying debt
and assuming credit risk. Now they are reeling and
are going to be wary of all the boogey men risks out
their. Especially the one they fear the most: the
power of organized labor. Meanwhile the government is
suffering from a shortage of labor, because they
overestimated their capabilities and went into a
multi-front Global War on Terrorism undermanned. That
is part of the logic of free market fundamentalism,
use technology and capital-intensive assets and try
to stay light of labor so you can operate more
flexibly. Now the fact that teenage Arabs and
Persians with small arms and makeshift explosive
devices are successfully defying the most powerful
military force in history has ruined the reputation
of neoconservatives, Zionists, and other hawks in the
field for which they are most respected: security.

You know chaos theory says that large, complex
systems will eventually break down due to small
deficiencies in the systems programming (the greatest
problem of the human race is the inability to
understand the exponential function). Well, that is
exactly what is happening to the empire of America.
Let us not fiddle while Rome burns.

In solidarity,
   -Nate The Cheshire Cat