P. 1
p.m.__bolo'bolo

p.m.__bolo'bolo

|Views: 24|Likes:
Bolo Bolo by P.M.
Bolo Bolo by P.M.

More info:

Published by: Dock Angus Ramsay Currie on Apr 22, 2013
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

05/29/2014

pdf

text

original

In case we’d like to try bolo’bolo, the next question will be: How can we

make it happen? Isn’t it just another Realpolitical proposal? In fact, bolo’bolo

cannot be realized with politics; there’s another road, a range of other roads,

to be followed.

If we deal with the Macine, the first problem is obviously a negative one:
How can we paralyze and eliminate the Macine’s control (i.e., the Macine

itself) in suc a way that bolo’bolo can unfold without being destroyed at the
start? We can call this aspect of our strategy “deconstruction”, or subversion.

Te Planetary Work-Macine has to be dismantled — carefully, because we
don’t want to perish together with it. Let’s not forget that we’re parts of the

Macine, that it is us. We want to destroy the Macine, not ourselves. We only
want to destroy our function for the Macine. Subversion means to cange the
relationships among us (the three types of workers) and towards the Macine

(whic faces all workers as a total system). It is subversion, not atac, since

we’re still all inside the Macine and have to bloc it from there. Te Macine

will never confront us as an external enemy. Tere will never be a front line,

no headquarters, no ranks, no uniforms.

83

Te township-assembly (dala) cooses two dudis among its members, also

by lot. Tese external delegates will be sent by another system of lots to
other assemblies (other townships, “counties”, regions) of another level and
another area. So a township in Lower Manhatan would send its observers
into the assembly of the region (see: vudo) Idaho, the assembly of Ducess

County would send observers into a township — asembly in Denver, the region

Chihuahua (Mexico) would send observers into the assembly of a county in

Texas, etc. Tese observers or delegates have the full right of vote and are not
bound to discretion — indiscretion and intereference in “foreign” affairs are in
fact their task.

Suc observers could destroy local corruption and introduce totally extrane-

ous opinions and atitudes — they’d disturb the sessions. Tey could prevent

assemblies from developing isolationist tendencies and regional egoisms.

Additionally, the assemblies of all levels could be limited in time (election

for one year only), by the principle of public meeting, by transmission on TV,
by the right of everybody to be heard during sessions, etc.

Te delegates of (bolos would have different statusses and would be more

or less independent from instructions by their bolos. Teir mandate would be
more or less imperative — it depends on what kind of bolo they represent, if its
more “liberal” or more “socialized”. Tey’re also responsible for the execution

of their decisions (this is another limitation of their bureaucratic tendencies)

and their activity can be considered as a kind of compulsory work (kene).

Te dalas of all levels cannot be compared to parliaments, governments
or even organs of self-administration. Tey’re just managing some social
interstices and agreements of the bolos. Teir legitimation is weak (lots),

their independence low, their tasks locally limited and merely practical. Tey

should rather be compared to “senates” or “houses of lords”, i.e., meetings
of representatives of independent units, a kind of feudal-democracy. Tey

aren’t even “confederations”. Te bolos can always boycot their decisions or
convoke general popular assemblies. . .

vudo

Te bolos will solve most of their problems alone or in their townships
(tegas). But at the same time most bolos will have farms or other resources

82

nomads

bolos

tega

market

single ibus

single households

Scematic view of an urban township (tega)

theirinternalorganizationisdeterminedbytheirlife-styleandculturalidentity.

But on the township-level (and all “higher” levels) the following procedures

could be reasonable (of course, the bolos of every township will find their own
system).

Te township affairs are discussed and put to work by a township-assem-
bly (dala) to whic every bolo sends two delegates. Additionally there will
be two external delegates (dudis) from other assemblies (see below). Te
bolo-delegates are appointed by lot, and half of the delegates must be of the
male sex (so that there is no over-representation by women, who form the
“natural” majority). Everybody participates in this casting of lots, even cil-
dren. Of course nobody could supervise and enforce suc a system; it could

only exist as an agreement among the bolos.

23

Subversion alone, though, will always be a failure, though with its help we
might paralyze a certain sector of the Macine, destroy one of its capabilities.

finally, the Macine is always able to reconquer and occupy again. Every
space initially obtained by subversion has instead to be filled by us with
something “new”, something “constructive”. We cannot hope to eliminate
first the Macine and then — in an “empty” zone — establish bolo’bolo; we’d
always arrive too late. Provisional elements of bolo’bolo, seedlings of its

structures, must occupy all free interstices, abandoned areas, conquered bases,
and prefigurate the new relationships. Construction has to be combined with

subversion into one process: substruction (or “conversion”, if you prefer this
one). Construction should never be a pretext to renounce on subversion.

Subversion alone creates only straw fires, historical dates and “heroes”, but it
doesn’t leave concrete results. Construction and subversion are both forms of
tacit or open collaboration with the Macine.

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->