i think its time to start a discourse on (im)mediacy within revolutionary currents.
someone like Emma Goldman would say that "direct action is the consistent method of anarchism"
but is putting every activity within only immediate means desirable? is it even possible? what's the subjectivity that has "immediate" means? can groups have immediate means to goals or is it reserved only for individuals?
i'm also reminded of Schmitt's discourse on the Sovereign. The Sovereign as the Decider Of The State Of Exception thus needs a Normal Situation by which to judge something to be exceptional. The Sovereign Makes and Maintains the Normal Situation that it judges its subjects by.
What mediates the sovereign?
@comebackkid44723 i don't think i agree. i'm interested on hearing an elaborated form of what you mean if you've got the time.
@exiliaex if you work every day to have meetups with other people in an apartment building to build trust and friendship, that can then turn into continuous action looking to get them onboard with something like a tenant union or co-op. Working on your coworkers to change their minds about capitalism & forming a union is a longer term process. Building mass movements, laying the groundwork for large scale general strikes-even carework could be looked at as having long term goals.
@exiliaex direct action can be taken that doesn’t have immediate results but is rather a slow, consistent action meant to build popular power against hierarchical power systems.