Irony?

[MilitantAnarchist]

Don't you find it ironic and offensive, that Primark, New Look and TK Maxx (for none UK people they are shit hole clothes stores) have t-shirts with Che Guevara on???

Also, the TOATALLY FUCKED UP IRONY of the swift cover insurance advert with iggy pop spray painting a circled A on? (i seem to remember them using anarchy symbols on the Brit Awards a few years ago)

Would you say this is capitalists just using anything that sells to make some cash,
OR
Capitalists scared of these things and they minimise the effect, impact and actions of Anarchy and revolutionaries?

[Muzk]

1

[Olerud]

They're just trying to make a quick buck, THE BASTERDS!. Che t-shirts are crap anyway even if they aren't from the anti-christ PRIMARK.

[Manifesto]

"The capitalists will sell us the rope with which we will hang them."

[Spawn of Stalin]

I don't find it particularly offensive when I see a big company making money off of Che's image, and I certainly don't see why an anarchist would. Aren't you supposed to despise the guy? In all seriousness though, they're just trying to make money, I doubt there is any hidden meaning.

[MilitantAnarchist]

I don't find it particularly offensive when I see a big company making money off of Che's image, and I certainly don't see why an anarchist would. Aren't you supposed to despise the guy? In all seriousness though, they're just trying to make money, I doubt there is any hidden meaning.

I have a patch on my trousers wit che getting his face smashed in... he is a leader, i dont respect leaders.... none the less i respect the idea of revolution he was involved with and his book on Guerrilla Warfare.... But i understand the concepts of Che Guevara-ism, and cheapo shitty clothing stores selling tshirts for people to wear on their chest when they dont understand what their wearing annoying.... i have many items of clothings with political statements on that could get me arrested and attacked (and i have been) and i still wear them because i stand by them... it is my beleif.... Che's message is/was equally un-appealing to capitalism...

I got annoyed at a tshirt that said PUNK IS DEAD with the DEAD crossed out and BACK written over it, and a skull with sid vicious' hair on, in the shop window for 2quid, i walk passed the shop and two lads going into the shop called me a freak and laughed...

It annoys me that they sell a political statement / ideology / culture that they dont respect or understand to people who treat that particular 'whatever' equal ignorance.

[which doctor]

Symbols like Che Guevara's portrait and anarchy A's pose no challenge to capitalism at all. Mostly, because these signs no longer symbolize what they once did. The process is called recuperation and happens to all sorts of images. The market takes once rebellious or subversive images and gradually changes what these images signify, making them simply benign at best and reactionary at worst.

One way to counteract the process of recuperation is to practice detournement where you reverse what the image signifies, restoring a subversive message (though not always the same subversive message of the original image). Detournement takes many different forms, but the following link is an example of detournement practiced on Che's iconic image: http://www.flickr.com/photos/normko/279974572/

[MilitantAnarchist]

Good point... Funny how it happens to 'our' images and will never happen to a Swastica (though i did see a hoody in some some shop with the SS death skull on)....

The thing is, images are nothing, the revolutionary actions come from the people... i just cant help but feel people dont 'fear' or 'understand' things anymore...

When i talk to people i dont know, and i say 'I'm an anarchist' they take it as some joke and 9 out of 10 go 'johnny fuckin rotten!!!!' which is another annoying thing... but it feels like capitalism has almost 'stolen' the spirit, just a little bit...

[Olerud]

http://i.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph/multimedia/archive/01001/john-lydon-butter-_1001965c.jpg
King of the anarchists.

[pierrotlefou]

Don't you find it ironic and offensive, that Primark, New Look and TK Maxx (for none UK people they are shit hole clothes stores) have t-shirts with Che Guevara on???

Also, the TOATALLY FUCKED UP IRONY of the swift cover insurance advert with iggy pop spray painting a circled A on? (i seem to remember them using anarchy symbols on the Brit Awards a few years ago)

Would you say this is capitalists just using anything that sells to make some cash,
OR
Capitalists scared of these things and they minimise the effect, impact and actions of Anarchy and revolutionaries?
Both I think. There was a big push in the 80's/90's to market everything "cool" and they tossed in everything that was counter culture to suppress it and relate it to a "youth fad" to keep it from being taken as serious in public political discourse. You don't hear of too many notable anarchists in the US these days and I think that is a direct result of branding of the counter culture. There is and always has been intent to crush anything anti-capitalist by any means necessary and they have had to find more indirect ways suppression.

[RedSonRising]

I think the anarchist A has been marketed as non-specific rebellious punk culture, while Che's image pretty much stands for what it always did. Even though the irony is there, people know more or less where you stand when you wear a Che shirt. People complain about the ignorant idiots wearing che shirts, but I meet more socialists wearing them than anyone else by far. There are tons of discussions about the morality of such purchases but I don't think it matters much at the end of the day.

If we care about the symbols, then we should work to restore their proper meaning (which would discourage market uses anyway).

[ls]

http://i.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph/multimedia/archive/01001/john-lydon-butter-_1001965c.jpg
King of the anarchists.

Johnny never said he was an anarchist-communist, syndicalist or any of that stuff ya know. Tbh the sex pistols did not have clear politics, they were simply 'anarchists' (make of that what you will). :p

[9]

I definitely don't think it has anything to do with capitalists trying to minimize anarchism because they are afraid of it. They used to be afraid of it. When my grandparents fled Moldova/Ukraine/Belarus and came to the US in the earlier part of the 20th century, every immigrant had to answer explicitly the question, "Are you an anarchist?" On all of my grandparents' ship manifests there are the basic questions (name, age, gender, occupation, height, weight, origin, destination, etc.) and then, seemingly completely out of place, the question "whether an anarchist?" This was a time, certainly in the US anyway, when the capitalist class was scared out of its whits over anarchism.
Now, unfortunately, anarchism (and communism, in many ways) has basically become synonymous with lifestylism, at least in the US, where it is much more a part of the trendy youth counterculture as opposed to being a coherent working class political theory or practice. And its been this way in the states with anarchism since the "punk scene" at least, and it has only continued getting worse with time. That the symbolism should become common in pop culture only seems to me to be an expected reflection of this fact.

[MilitantAnarchist]

Johnny never said he was an anarchist-communist, syndicalist or any of that stuff ya know. Tbh the sex pistols did not have clear politics, they were simply 'anarchists' (make of that what you will). :p


The Pistols weren't anarchists in anyway atall... the only people that think they were are people who dont understand anything about anarchy.
They were rebellious and anarch-ish.... i guess you could say...
But, i dont want this to turn into another 'anarcho-punk debate' but Crass WERE anarchists, they lived what they sung about. Johnny Rotten is snearing 'WE MEAN IT MAAAN!!!!' on top of the pops, and they didnt mean it atall... The way i see it (Johnny in particular) they were angry working class kids who hated the fucking bullshit, then got turned into celebritys over night to become part of the capitalist money printing machine... and in the end got fucked over by it, and Malcom ****-head-twat-faced-**** Maclaren.
Great band though.

[ls]

The Pistols weren't anarchists in anyway atall... the only people that think they were are people who dont understand anything about anarchy.


1 a : absence of government b : a state of lawlessness or political disorder due to the absence of governmental authority c : a utopian society of individuals who enjoy complete freedom without government

It has several definitions, it's dishonest to say it means just one thing and is an easy way to alienate people, it's better to explain that your/our definition of anarchy is not really the generally accepted definition (then expand from there of course). :p


They were rebellious and anarch-ish.... i guess you could say...
But, i dont want this to turn into another 'anarcho-punk debate' but Crass WERE anarchists, they lived what they sung about. Johnny Rotten is snearing 'WE MEAN IT MAAAN!!!!' on top of the pops, and they didnt mean it atall... The way i see it (Johnny in particular) they were angry working class kids who hated the fucking bullshit, then got turned into celebritys over night to become part of the capitalist money printing machine... and in the end got fucked over by it, and Malcom ****-head-twat-faced-**** Maclaren.
Great band though.

Of course I agree they weren't really the generally-accepted-definition-by-the-left of anarchist, but that's what I said earlier. :p I find it hilarious that some people on revleft think Mclaren was anything other than a Capitalist (he was a situationist according to some on here :rolleyes:) as well.