GazzBut said:

Why dont you just bring up a philisophical subject for discussion and see how people get on without referring to any "big name" philosophers... You can always introduce people to the concepts and ideas of the likes of Bey etc etc as they come up in discussion.

---

Quote:

do you think there is a difference between a Permanent Autonomous Zone and a Permanent Temporary Autonomous Zone?

---

Objective or subjective difference? Objectively probably none, subjectivly possibly a great deal. Any permanent temporary condition is in conflict with itself yet remains permanent. This would best be descibed as a Permanently Unstable Autonomous Zone.
Am I getting close? Bey was BOOORING so didn't pay much attn when I read(uh, yeah) the work.
I amy not be a "philosopher stoned" but I've read a bit and if nothing else will give off some mental Gordian knots to play with.
WR

whiterasta said:

Quote:

do you think there is a difference between a Permanent Autonomous Zone and a Permanent Temporary Autonomous Zone?

---

Objective or subjective difference? Objectively probably none, subjectivly possibly a great deal. Any permanent temporary condition is in conflict with itself yet remains permanent. This would best be descibed as a Permanently Unstable Autonomous Zone.

---

Quote:

Q-Are you suggesting that small groups, communities, local governments, whatever, right here in the USA, declare themselves "permanent autonomous zones?"
A-Why yes, in fact. Thanks for putting that question so succinctly! Why should this sort of resistance to globalization activity fall only to indigenous people in remote mountainous areas of the planet?

Let's take US Greens, for example, who can make an invaluable contribution to this topic with your considerable involvement in local grass-roots politics and elections, including many election victories of late. This would not distract you from your main focus, since all you'd have to do is send in an occasional summary of local successes (or failures) of Green involvement in local self-government ("autonomy"). The Bill of Rights Defense initiative among municipalities comes to mind as an example of a movement toward autonomy from Washington. Another example is the tiny municipality in Pennsylvania seeking to end corporate "personhood" for corporations within its jurisdiction. A third example would be the struggle of Californians (proven to be decidedly un-autonomous) to maintain their legal medical marijuana programs in the face of Federal efforts to eradicate their local self-determination.

Q-Hey ! Is this a left-wing thing, or a right-wing thing? Dammit, I won't be associated with something that is on my wrong wing, dammit!
A-Sorry, you're on your own there, my friend.

The idea of a manual is also to create a self-fulfilling prophecy about a very important upcoming date--the astronomically-predicted end of a great cycle on the Mayan Long-Count calendar, the date Dec. 21, 2012, and the beginning of a new great cycle. This was believed to be a time of huge changes in civilization (a big "paradigm shift" if you will). For example, if enough people begin to believe that autonomy is possible, then the possibility grows for permanent autonomous zones which owe less and less allegiance to the global economy and its dominating security force centered in Washington, D.C.

Q-So you're not suggesting some sort of Christian "end-times" or apocalyptic Millennial movement here?
A-Aw, hell no. Those are "spectator" trends. All you have to do in those systems is be a believer, and await the Rapture. Or hang out somewhere on an appointed date and await the UFOs to take you off-planet. Well, this autonomy is gonna take hella work. You have to participate in it, you can't spectate. But I would like to listen to some "apocalypso" music right now, can you put on a CD?

---

Sclorch said:

I want to talk about contemporary philosophers.
Deleuze... Derrida... Hakim Bey...

---

Zekebomb said:

Sclorch said:

I want to talk about contemporary philosophers.
Deleuze... Derrida... Hakim Bey...

---

dude you're talking to contemporary philosophers
honestly, 'how many phil books you own'??

---

Frog said:

It's all philosophy.  It just so happens that it's all modern. 
What, are you waiting for Plato to appear?
Everything we discuss here is the philosophical matter of our times.  We will never discuss the stuff that Plato discussed when Plato was around.

---

You lost me.
Your point appears to be a non sequitur. 

Sclorch said:

I'm not trying to be a dick. I just want to know the knowledge boundaries of the current S&P population.
One doesn't have to read a book to be a philosopher, but a lack of familiarity with what's already been covered by others is going to limit discussion.

---