RE: EJ and the Political "Chessgame"

[Rasputine <l43384@alfa.ist.utl.pt>]

On Tue, 2 Feb 1999 rcalvom@ctv.es wrote:

> Certainly, I am not a anarch. I am an observer of the anarch - from 
> a bourgeoise position. And I would like to be one of its "painters".
> I mean, in the chessgame:-)

  I've tried to be an anarch and by that I consider myself one and would
like to take a chair near you :).

>  ... an anarch would likely not reveal this to the world,
> > regardless of the real value or harmlessness of the practice. Why take any
> > chances when you never know who is listening or how society may change?
> 
> Bad movement:-). The anarch offers information in  certain groups, 
> and when he decides- he believes in litle circles, see Eumeswill. 
> The anarch analize pragamatically the situations. talking about 
> THC is not dangerous anymore. More over, could be a funny, 
> popular detail of an autobiography:-). Modern anarch should take 
> account medias and publicity are including in the camouflage:-). 
> This is an example of two movements of the game.

  I think anarch can take media in account but not to promote it's views
due to the unpredictability  (wrong spelling?) of the audience. He can be
a part of it but not taking part in the information it uses (confuse?). 


> The game basis are simply. a: try do build the board- perhaps in a 
> noveled way. Draw the figures: anarch, bourgeoise, worker, 
> waldwanger, put them in "our everyday world". Place the enclosing 
> frame, the laws and the limits.
>                                          b: once built, put the "figures" in action.
>                                          c: try to do best, but with fair play.  
>                                          D: lŽart pour lŽart

   Sorry to be not completely familiar with the workers figure as drwan by
Junger but about the suicidary pieces like revolutionaries and such?

			best regards,
		           
                              Ricardo Reis

			      "NON SERVIAM"