Crafting Gentleness

Thursday, January 24, 2008

a more generous conjuring

"... words have unbridled power to shape or determine our perceptions of others and ourselves, unless we intervene and re-use language to our purpose. Which means of course that we then need to find out what our purpose is. Also that generalized categories often produce a kind of 'blanket constriction', pinning the subject within that category; a form of imprisonment. As soon as we question and unravel what lies within such generalizations, we produce particular examples, make comparisons, suppose the situation were like this. Then we unlock and permit to have its play the saving, redeeming power of language in its quality of discrimination, exactitude and compassionate sifting of elements into a broader and more generous conjuring."

Nicki Jackowska, Write For Life (1997/2003), p. xix

(Thanks Dougald)

Saturday, January 19, 2008

Reading

I haven't been blogging, sorry, just a few things going on. Also, I've been reading like billy-oh. Finally catching up on a few classics (Hannah Arendt, Franz Fanon, Albert Memmi).

Back soon :)

Saturday, January 12, 2008

Listen Again (BBC Radio 3): Gandhi and Non-Violence

http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio3/nightwaves/pip/dqr2g/

"... this month marks the anniversary of the assassination of Gandhi. But sixty years after his death, is his non-violent approach any longer of much use to oppressed groups? Kenan debates this with his studio guests, peace activist Scilla Elworthy and professor of political sciences, Bidyut Chakrabarty. Furthermore, the Slovenian philosopher Slavoj Zizek tells Kenan why he thinks that violence extends beyond the infliction of physical damage. ..."

Personally, I found the Zizek interview frustrating and largely a confirmation for me that Zizek tends not to speak an awful lot of sense. The rest of the conversation, once Zizek was left behind, was for me scintillating, insightful, and provocative (although the presenter didn't seem to me to be a very good listener).

(Thanks Paul)

48 hrs of Lynns

On Thursday morning I happen to find out that the middle name of a person I've known for a while is Lynn.

On Thursday evening I happen to find out that the middle name of another person that I've known for yonks is Lynn.

On Friday I go to invigilate an examination on campus. I got the time wrong. I'm sent to help out with invigilation in another room, where there is only one student. That student's name is ... you've guessed it.

I was telling all of this to a friend in San Francisco on the phone last night (Friday night) and she proceeded to tell me that her middle name was Lynn, too.

Friday, January 11, 2008

Slowdancing

http://www.slowdancingfilms.com/about.html

(Thanks Hannah)

Adbusters: "The Design Anarchist's Bible"

http://adbusters.org/blogs/The_Design_Anarchists_Bible.html

"Design Anarchy is Kalle Lasn's barbaric yawp over the roofs of the design world. Part personal scrapbook of all things that have infuriated him over the years, part political, psychological and ecological polemic, the book is a manifesto on how the merger of design and commerce is eviscerating the spontaneous, individual, creative, healthy, happy, messy soul of our world and replacing it with nothing more than a consumption-driven pseudo-culture."

Thursday, January 03, 2008

The Lucifer Effect Website

"Welcome to LuciferEffect.org, official web site of The Lucifer Effect: Understanding How Good People Turn Evil (Random House, 2007). In this book, I [Philip Zimbardo] summarize more than 30 years of research on factors that can create a "perfect storm" which leads good people to engage in evil actions. This transformation of human character is what I call the "Lucifer Effect," named after God's favorite angel, Lucifer, who fell from grace and ultimately became Satan.

"Rather than providing a religious analysis, however, I offer a psychological account of how ordinary people sometimes turn evil and commit unspeakable acts. As part of this account, The Lucifer Effect tells, for the first time, the full story behind the Stanford Prison Experiment, a now-classic study I conducted in 1971. In that study, normal college students were randomly assigned to play the role of guard or inmate for two weeks in a simulated prison, yet the guards quickly became so brutal that the experiment had to be shut down after only six days.
How and why did this transformation take place, and what does it tell us about recent events such as the Abu Ghraib prisoner abuses in Iraq? Equally important, what does it say about the "nature of human nature," and what does it suggest about effective ways to prevent such abuses in the future?

"Please join me in a journey that the poet Milton might describe as making “darkness visible.” Although it is often hard to read about evil up close and personal, we must understand its causes in order to contain and transform it through wise decisions and innovative communal actions. Indeed, in my view, there is no more urgent task that faces us today."


http://www.lucifereffect.com/

Stanford Prison Experiment Website

"Welcome to the Stanford Prison Experiment web site, which features an extensive slide show and information about this classic psychology experiment, including parallels with the abuse of prisoners at Abu Ghraib. What happens when you put good people in an evil place? Does humanity win over evil, or does evil triumph? These are some of the questions we posed in this dramatic simulation of prison life conducted in the summer of 1971 at Stanford University."

How we went about testing these questions and what we found may astound you. Our planned two-week investigation into the psychology of prison life had to be ended prematurely after only six days because of what the situation was doing to the college students who participated. In only a few days, our guards became sadistic and our prisoners became depressed and showed signs of extreme stress. Please join me on a slide tour describing this experiment and uncovering what it tells us about the nature of human nature."

http://www.prisonexp.org/

Shut Down Guantanamo: January 11, 2008

Shut Down Guantanamo: January 11, 2008

"Immediately close the detention center atGuantanamo Bay, Cuba, and either release itsinmates or bring them before an impartial tribunal."- United Nations Human Rights Commission

CALL TO ACTION

We declare January 11, 2008, six years after the first prisoners arrived at Guantanamo, an International Day of Action to Shut Down Guantanamo. In Washington, DC we will hold a permitted demonstration at the National Mall followed by an orange jumpsuit procession to the Supreme Court. There will also be solidaritydemonstrations in Chicago, Miami, London and Paris, with more being added every day. We invite you to come to Washington and participate, or else join or plan an action in your own community. We also encourage people around the world to wear orange t-shirts, armbands or other orange clothing on January 11th to mark the date.

JOIN US IN WASHINGTON, DC

Friday, January 11, 11:00am. (National Mall).

Map of the location:http://tinyurl. com/ynn3te

The day involves several elements: Demonstration at the National Mall. Witness Against Torture has teamed up with Amnesty International andthe National Religious Campaign Against Torture to hold a permitted demonstration on the National Mall at 11:00am. (Gather at 12th street NW between Madison Dr NW & Jefferson Drive SW - near the Smithsonian Metro Stop.)

"Prisoners of Guantanamo March."

A provocative street theater performance involving people wearing orange jump suits and black hoods. We will march from the National Mall to the Supreme Court in an orderly silent procession hauntingly evoking the moral disgrace that is Guantanamo. With your help, we will form a prisoner contingent including as many protesters as there are prisoners.

Funeral Ceremony at the Supreme Court.

Following the procession to the Supreme Court, we will hold a Funeral Ceremony to remember the four men who died in custody at Guantanamo and to mourn the death of Habeas Corpus. Like last year, some may choose to risk arrest.

To participate, please consider attending an orientation meeting on Thursday, 4pm, at St. Stephen and the Incarnation Church (1525 Newton Street, NW) or come early to the National Mall for an orientation and rehearsal at 10:00am.

Please let us know in advance if you are willing toparticipate in either the Prisoners Contingent, Nonviolent Direct Action, or both.

Email jan11@witnesstortur e.org or call Matt Daloisio at 201-264-4424.

For up-to-date details as well as information abouthousing, food, rides and directions, legal support and much more, please visit our web site at www.WitnessTorture. org .

WEAR ORANGE ON JANUARY 11TH!

Wherever you are on January 11th, we encourage you to wear orange to raise public awareness and strengthen the movement to demand an end to torture and indefinite detention. Consider wearing one of Witness Against Torture's Orange "Shut Down Guantanamo" T-shirts, <http://www.caebutto ns.com/guantanam o.php> an ACLU arm band, <http://tinyurl. com/2c4mnu> or even an orange jumpsuit. <http://www.witnesst orture.org/ jumpsuit>

JOIN THE GROWING NUMBER OF LOCAL VIGILS -ATTEND OR ORGANIZE AN ACTION IN YOUR COMMUNITY

If you can't join us in Washington D.C., please consider attending or organizing a vigil, march or a public forum in your community. Actions are currently planned in London, England; Paris, France; Miami, FL; Boise, Idaho; Philadelphia, PA; Saratoga Springs, NY; San Francisco, CA; Ft. Huachuca, AZ; and New York City, NY. Visit www.WitnessTorture. org for up-to-date details about solidarity events, as well as to find ideas for actions, to post to our calendar, or to download flyers and other resources.

WHO WE ARE

Two years ago Witness Against Torture drew

international attention after it walked to Guantanamo to visit the prisoners. Upon its return, the group has organized vigils, marches, nonviolent direct actions and educational events to expose and decry the administration' s lawlessness, build awareness about torture and indefinite detention, and forge human ties with the prisoners at Guantanamo and their families.

Some of the organizations endorsing the Jan 11 Day of Action include:
Act Against Torture Bill of Rights Defense Committee
The Catholic Worker
Center for Constitutional Rights
Code Pink
Declaration of Peace
International Federation of Human Rights
National Campaign for Nonviolent Resistance
Network of Spiritual Progressives
Pax Christi USA
Peace Action
School of the Americas Watch
Torture Abolition and Survivors Coalition
United for Peace and Justice
Voices For Creative Nonviolence
War Resisters LeagueWorld Can't Wait...and more.

See a full list of endorsers.<http://www.witnesst orture.org/ jan11_endorsers>

DONATE

Please make a contribution to help cover the costs of the January 11th event. You can donate online<http://www.witnesst orture.org/ donate> or send a check made out to "Witness Against Torture"to Mary House Catholic Worker, 55 E. Third Street, NewYork, NY 10003.

www.WitnessTorture. org--

Wednesday, January 02, 2008

Recommended Article, and some commentary

Why the Theories of John Dewey and Paulo Freire Cannot Contribute to Revitalizing the Commons
http://ecojusticeeducation.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=33&Itemid=46

C.A. Bowers (University of Oregon)

"The commons are not a theoretical abstraction. Rather, their many dimensions exist in the knowledge, embodied experiences, practices, and patterns of moral reciprocity that characterize those aspects of daily life that have not been co-opted by the market. The commons vary from culture to culture, but a key feature of all the world’s diverse commons is that they are not created anew by each generation or by individuals who rely exclusively on critical reflection. “Tradition” is the best word for describing the varied characteristic of the commons--with some of the traditions being sources of injustice and environmental degradation while others contribute to community self-sufficiency and are sources of resistance to globalization (sometimes within the same culture). Instead of continuing to be captives of the Enlightenment thinkers’ narrow and culturally uninformed understanding of tradition, which been passed down over generations and reproduced in the thinking of many current progressive theorists, there is a need to learn about the traditions carried on within what remains of the local commons—traditions that include the language of moral reciprocity and that sustains the memory of the civil institutions and practices that are safeguards against the forces of fascism and economic exploitation that are now again on the rise."

***

Although I myself do not tend to use the term 'commons', I am also in favour of a reinvestment in the term 'tradition', but one that invites specificity of context in relation to people and what they value and the consequences of their attitudes. 'Traditions' for me are important, but understood as 'ways of thinking, ways of doing considered within a context of relationship or community'. I wrote the following a long while back (and have changed bit of it here and there for this purpose):

It seems to me that "tradition", like "culture", tends to be a concept that facilitates debate, argument, and worse (see, for example, Eisenstadt, ed. 1972; Shils 1981; Hobsbawm and Ranger, eds. 1983; Handler and Linnekin 1984; Hellas, Lash, and Morris, eds. 1996). Most ways of talking about "tradition" in academic circles tend to rely heavily on what can be termed "naturalistic metaphors". Any metaphor that is "naturalistic" is used in such a way that there is an assumed exact equivalence between what actually happens and what the metaphor says is the case. To use an extreme example, if I say someone is a banana, and continue to talk and act as if the person is actually a banana, then I am using that metaphor naturalistically. The two most common metaphors used when people talk about "tradition" are 'tradition is an entity' and 'tradition is the passing of things from one person to another'. The thinking runs as follows:

1) There is a thing called "tradition". It can be understood as a bounded, discrete entity, and often refers to a stable, sometimes fixed, store of core aspects of a group's identity. Recourse is also taken to the Roman etymology of the term "tradition", which suggests that "tradition" refers to a traditum, any thing handed down from the past to the present, or a traditio, which suggests the transferral of ownership over a thing. If we do enough scholarly work, the case goes, we can identify any particular "tradition" and characterize it in terms of its contents and essential characteristics.

2) "Tradition" exists, but it's not a bounded, discrete entity. Rather, "tradition" is a discrete process of "handing down" or "transmission", in which discrete, bounded entities of various sorts (e.g. folklore, folkways, symbols, songs, tunes, stories etc. etc.) are passed down from one person to another, usually "from generation to generation".

3) “Tradition” exists, but it’s a discrete process as well as being some sort of entity. “Tradition” works as an agent in our lives, in the manner of an “invisible hand,” similar to the invisible hand of the market. “Tradition,” understood in this manner, can often be assumed to have a life of its own (“Living Tradition”), can often be assumed to evolve (“The Evolution of Tradition”), and can also often be assumed to exercise aesthetic judgement (“Tradition-as-aesthetic-filtration-process”).

It has become commonplace in anthropology, sociology, cultural studies, and folklore to draw attention to the inadequacies of thinking about experience in terms of bounded entities. Life, thankfully, is more complicated than that (although that doesn't stop entity-speak continuing to be a major aspect of many academic ways of thinking). To insist upon understanding “tradition” as an entity or as a process of entity transaction, or even as a processual entity, is to participate in the construction of reified commodities, whereby we are encouraged to think of “tradition” or the “units of transmission” as somehow having a transcendent, stable existence independent of the uncertain lives we lead and experience. It may be comfortable to think this way, but they aren’t actually bananas.

Nevertheless, academics and other analysts often use the term “tradition” in either or both of these ways, dazzling us with terminological halls of mirrors, blinding us with shifting meanings and marshy conceptualization. We are often convinced that such naturalistic metaphorical excursions are valid, accurate ways of speaking in analytical ways about reality by virtue of their supposedly legitimate academic history.

These naturalistic metaphorical constructions of "tradition" seem to me to be profoundly commodifying in terms of the abstract understandings they afford us of our experience. All three versions rely heavily on the existence of discrete, bounded entities. As a consequence, discussion about "tradition" in these terms tends to revolve around issues of access to, and control and ownership of the entities that constitute "tradition". In other words, discussions generally concern 'resource management', or rather, "tradition management". We become managers, concerned with choosing among various management regimes in order to transmit, protect, and/or preserve.

What this sort of approach leaves out, for me, is any consideration of the implicitly educational possibilities of whatever people might mean by 'tradition' other than understanding education as the delivery of information. Speaking as an educator, I find that approaching education as information transmission, protection, and/or preservation can easily lead me to ignore the richness of educational encounter, the personal, present, affectual dimensions of how education can work. Education in face-to-face contexts can be understood to be predominantly about being with, about living 'withness', about the attitudes of the people in the room, about the respect or lack of it within the interactions. When education or 'tradition' are understood as entity-transfer of some sort, it is very hard to even have discussions about respect, attitude, presence, or, dare I say it, gentleness. It's all too easy to default to those attitudes that facilitate the most efficient transaction of resources, those attitudes that allow us to distance ourselves from being us-and-no-one-else and instead allow us to play the roles of 'providers' in an exchange relationship (if you're lucky).

I'm very fond of something that Sunday Business Post journalist Tom McGurk once wrote in the context of a discussion of the term "traditional": "While it doesn't matter what you call it, it does matter what it is supposed to mean" (1995:25). So, let me turn it around. I want to start not with things, but with the way that I (we?) make sense of life. I would suggest that we each craft or negotiate our experience with the aid of working assemblies of ways of thinking and ways of doing that we work out as we go along. I can use many different terms to refer to these: for example, habits, routines, norms, guidelines, principles, procedures, protocols, belief systems, philosophies, ways of life, rules, training, rituals, standards, laws, and the list goes on. I would further suggest that these working assemblies of ways of thinking and ways of doing are often considered specifically within a context of community (where, with my theoretical hat on, I understand community as expectational resonance in social interaction). When this happens, I refer to these 'working assemblies' (when speaking in English) with terms such as "convention", "custom", "education", "culture", or "tradition".

Experience of these working assemblies I would think varies from person to person. They can run the gamut from being gently guiding and loosely provisional, to being highly-directive and deeply engrained (and then very much in the domain of duty, obligation, and absolutes). How a person experiences these working assemblies depends on the circumstances they find themselves in, and their attitude to those circumstances. To discern the more hardened 'working assemblies' in your own experience, what Prakash and Esteva refer to as "arrogant particularisms" (1998:2), ask yourself: "What am I willing to argue about?" or "How often do I use the word 'should'?"

If "tradition" might be one way to speak of ways of thinking and doing in our experience, then, it seems to me, not so helpful to abstractly define "tradition" as a universal analytic category that somehow refers to timeless entities that are separate from experience. It might not be so important, then, to argue what is or isn't "tradition" or "traditional", but rather to ask what ways of thinking and doing are influential in my, your, people's experience. What's the harm in suspending the word 'tradition', hanging it up on a coat hook, until I have a clearer idea what I'd like to use the term to discuss. It would be a terrible shame if by focusing on the words "tradition" and "traditional" I managed to evade the issue of people's particular experiences and lived differences in favour of the commodifying allure of verbal games. What I believe to be helpful, particularly in the light of persuasive rhetoricians who deploy the terms "tradition" and "traditional" to serve very particular agendas, is to ask for a little specificity: 'Whose ways of thinking and doing?', 'In what circumstances?', 'In the promotion of which values?', 'With what effects?'.

Prakash and Esteva make the case that formal education furthers the destruction of "traditional communities" by undermining "traditional values". In light of the above discussion, to use the terms "traditional" or "education" as analytic categories is, for me, almost entirely unhelpful without looking specifically at the particular social circumstances we are referring to, which people are thinking the thinking and doing the doing, what exactly they are thinking and doing, and with what effects. This approach is personally demanding, requiring constant vigilance against overstatement and overgeneralization.

That said, I wish to leave four questions hanging:

What is valued, where, and how, and by whom?
What values are fostered by formal education?
What values are not fostered by formal education?
What do we want our kids to learn about life? (I don't have kids, but I can hope :)

Prakash and Esteva speak of "traditional values" in terms of a "commons": "... the children of a community, pursuing the promises of education, systematically learn to forget the languages of their commons and their communities" (1998:8), and again: "However passionately committed to cultural diversity, the classroom must necessarily be the cemetery of sensibilities cultivated in commons and communities ..." (1998:26). A little care is called for here, however. The term "commons" is most often a defensive concept, called upon in the context of a perceived threat of encroaching and commodifying enclosure. This is clearly how the term is used by Prakash and Esteva. There are, however, generally two different understandings of the term 'commons':
The first and dominant understanding is that the "commons" is a store of resources that people hold in common. To speak of the "commons" in this way is, I would suggest, to present an always-already commodifying and commodified space. Typically, then, debate about a resource-commons tends to be largely limited to discussions over access, control, and ownership. Further, action arising from defense of an always-already commodified space is always unlikely to curb the commodifying influences of enclosure.

A second take on the concept of "commons" (and one more in line with Chet Bower's approach, as far as I can make out) is more concerned with people and how people relate to each other. In these cases, the concept of the "commons" is again used as a defense against commodifying enclosure, but refers to a particular character of relationships rather than to resources. The uncommodifying attitudes of the people who participate in the "commons" are felt to be incompatible with the commodifying attitudes ushered in with the effects of enclosure.

On the basis of research done and research still to do, I now suggest that what many of us have long referred to as "traditional culture" in Ireland (and elsewhere) is often the second of these, a particular character of social life which arises in particular circumstances from a general and personal orientation in which relatedness and relationship are not only acknowledged but fostered and facilitated. I think of certain house ceilidhs I've been to in the company of extended family, for example, or some of my best evenings in the company of friends.

I think it's good to ground what I'm saying in some way. To do this I am simply going to give a randomly-selected list of provisional principles which I have come across as "wisdoms", that is, emotionally-healthy, humanizing ways of thinking and doing. In my experience, these are not inconsistent with the uncommodifying attitudes of which I speak, although this will really depend on the circumstances in which they play out. This isn't by way of prescription. It's not that I think these are principles everyone should follow, simply that I have found them helpful, and you may too. Where did I learn them? From other people, to state the oft-forgotten obvious. From my parents and their parents before them. From people I have met and admire. One of the joys of my work as someone who studies anthropology is that I get to talk to people, read what people have written, learn from people, and it's my job. No-thing was "passed down" or "transmitted". They simply speak of ways in which I can orient myself in my experience in relationship to my experience. These are some of the "traditions" that I would like to dominate my life:

  • Respect, humility, gentleness, generosity, and compassion are important
  • Wisdom is more important than knowledge or information
  • Silence is often okay
  • You don't have to be conspicuous
  • People are more than the sum of their resources or talents
  • There's more to life than collecting tunes or songs
  • Absolute authorities or certitudes have no place among friends
  • You don't need Press Releases, certificates, diplomas, or degrees to be a decent human being, and having them may not get you any closer to being one
  • Your personal experience is valued and respected, and you value and respect the personal experience of others
  • If you've got nothing good to say, say nothing
  • I am/you are not a lesser being because I/you do not:
    play such and such an instrument
    play, sing, or dance professionally
    read musical notation
    have a certificate/diploma/grade/degree/Ph.D.

  • They aren't easy "traditions", in fact they are sometimes difficult to live by, but that's the challenge. There is a wealth of wisdom there for us among people we can know and love, if we'd just listen occasionally. These and other similar "traditions" constitute a powerful politics for being human, a powerful politics with which to counter the increasing commodification of experience.

    What I want to suggest is that, despite much wishful thinking, such values are highly unlikely to be fostered by the environments of formal education (nor, indeed, by traditionalist institutions, festivals, tourism, representational government, archives, competitions, or the legal system). Uncommodifying values are inappropriate to the commodifying values of formally-conceived situations, and vice versa. For example, in discussions about "traditional culture" and formal education in Ireland it is often assumed that the inclusion of "Irish traditional music", "Irish traditional dance", or "Irish traditional song" in formal education curricula unproblematically promotes the transmission of "traditional culture". For me, such thinking is not at all unproblematic. Indeed, I think we often systematically forget, ignore, or wilfully turn away from powerful, uncommodifying, and humanizing politics, and replace them with the commodifying strategies and commodified resources of formal education. And we do this because we are often led to believe, by way of the miracles of naturalistic metaphors and mystifying terminology, that they're the same. They're not.

    So what can we do about it? Surely this is a rather hopeless scenario? Not at all. So what am I advocating? I am suggesting that we try to spend more time fostering and enjoying the uninstitutionalized, unscripted, uncommodifying situations that come about when people simply hang out together. I am suggesting we learn to identify the different masks that we wear as we commodify our experience. I am suggesting we notice how important 'things' have become and maybe consider life a little more in terms of our relationships and relatedness to others. I am suggesting that we encourage less misrepresentative and less mystifying analyses of 'what is actually going on'. I am suggesting that we take time to identify our absolutes and certitudes, and challenge them. I am suggesting that we be less enthusiastic about all-out lobbying for the increasing inclusion of "tradition" in formal education (Again, which "traditions"?, whose values?). I am suggesting that we be less enthusiastic about all-out lobbying for unity where "tradition" is concerned, or where anything is concerned, for that matter. I am suggesting that each of us takes a moment to bring the chickens home to roost, asking ourselves: "What are my "traditions"? What are my values? Have I ever questioned the legitimacy of educational authorities? Have I ever questioned the validity or necessity of formal education? What has been my experience of formal education?" The commodification of our experience doesn't take place without our participation. We aren't victims. As long as there are people there are humanizing possibilities.






    Happy New 1984 [from a German Blog]

    Happy New 1984 ... is a slogan I heard a lot during the last days at Chaos Communication Congress (24c3). In fact there was a strong demonstration as a part of the congress with 500-1000 people (depending on the sources) against data retention and surveillance: the German data retention law was introduced last year and came into effect today. Very nice action in the middle of after-x-mass hopping at Berlin Alexanderplatz. There's some videos and pictures.(Conference recordings and more links below)

    During the demonstration as well as during the conference itself Iwas surprised, and glad, to find that the links between hacking, surveillance, technology and the war on terror seemed almost self-evident. Article 129a, the German law to prosecute terrorism, was mentioned in the demonstration when everybody chanted "We are all 129a" (it rhymes better German) as well as several talks and e.g. during the famous 'Hacker Jeopardy' game show. This year a new category was introduced: 'Brave new world'; and at least one question referred directly to terrorism. My lecture on living with surveillance and blogging about it was starting point for a number of discussions. Isn't it a contradiction to suffer from police surveillance, to not want to have your privacy violated on the one hand and then to go out and seek the most of publicity through blogging and talking at an event like the 24c3? Interesting point and in fact this did made me think about whetherI actually wanted to blog for at least a month before I started. I

    am very fond of my privacy. I still advise people to encrypt andto anonymise as much as possible, and luckily the Federal Court ofJustice was kind enough to argue in its decision in October that it is*not* criminal to encrypt emails and that in fact you are perfectly entitled to *not* take your mobile whereever you go and still that's not terrorist in itself.

    My point is that I (mostly) don't blog about personal things other than surveillance and how that interferes with our lives (of myfamily, that is). One goal of surveillance is to intimidate and shut you up, at least when it is done in such an obvious way. The threat of locking someone up for years is quite effective.

    Talking and writing about it is a way of not accepting to be shut up.

    Also I learned that a wide majority of my readers and listeners are extremely shocked about the extent and methods of surveillance 'ina democratic country like ours'. There are a lot of comments saying they'd imagined something like that in China, Russia, Eastern bloc, but not here. This is not so much about my, or our, privacy any more because that was fundamentally destroyed by police and agencies as it is. It's about attacking a privacy, or better secrecy (of intruding into people's lives) the authorities seem to assume and in fact have when they target someone.

    At least in Germany it seems that nobody has blogged about what it is like when all available means of surveillance are used against you and what that is like in everyday life. And so while many people are generally aware that this exists and many approve of using these measures against 'real terrorists' a typical reaction was: "But I didn't think they'd use this with ordinary people" (meaning: 'like me'). Of course, just some years ago there was no web 2.0, and getting through to mainstream media with something like this is a whole different ballgame. As was told very impressingly by Annie Machon, former MI5 agent who became a whistleblower.

    The number of German phones that are tapped are published every year -close to 40.000 last year. Data retention is in place now, UK has it,I taly has it, Denmark has it, other countries are going to follow and we're far from public outcries about it.

    I was stunned to see so many people apparently be genuinely shockedabout our experiences. Through comments to my blog and elsewhere, but also during the CCC Congress - there were hundreds of people in the audience and many expressed the same things after my talk. And these are the very people who deal with surveillance and how to prevent itall the time. In this case blogging seemed to make the difference.

    Obviously my ultimate aim is not to shock people. It's a very thin line between giving information about this and scaring people with the result that then they dare to do/say even less. We've seen it- there are students now who wonder whether it's wise to research gentrification.

    When I started blogging my main motive was to not have all these crazy little stories stuck in my brain and body. Writing helps. I had hoped to stir debate as a side effect maybe and I am not flattering myself with the idea that my blog will make a big difference. But I do hope now that it'll contribute also to people not wanting to accept this general direction of more control, more 'security', less freedom.

    I'd be interested in ideas and comments. Preferably on a only semi-abstract level - e.g. with examples from real life: what worked,what didn't? I am after all more activist than academic ;).

    Living my life, living with the terrorism proceedings against my partner and blogging about it didn't leave the time to do this in two languages and so most of my blog posts were (are) in German since my main audience is the German public. At the same time it's not singular and I'm sure very similar things are happening in other parts of the 'civilised world'.

    After my (English) talk at the 24c3 someone stood up and offered to translate the blog into English. A wiki site was set up and people are working on this. I have started copying these texts into my blog. You can find these translations plus the few things I wrote in English myself here: http://annalist.noblogs.org/category/en

    Anna, aka Anne Roth

    Links24c3 conference recordings
    http://events.ccc.de/congress/2007/Conference_Recordingshttp://dewy.fem.tu-ilmenau.de/CCC/24C3/

    mp4's e.g. at
    http://thepiratebay.org/search/24c3*mp4

    24c3 program
    http://events.ccc.de/congress/2007/Fahrplan/

    My talkon sevenload:
    http://www.fixmbr.de/anne-roth-what-is-terrorism-24c3-video/

    mp4http://dewy.fem.tu-ilmenau.de/CCC/24C3/mpeg4/24c3-2381-en-what_is_terrorism.mp4

    ipod cpmpatiblehttp://ftp.uni-kl.de/24C3/mp4/24c3-2381-en-what_is_terrorism-COMPATIBLE.mp4

    Demonstration against data retention
    http://de.indymedia.org/2007/12/203777.shtmlhttp://24c3.datenkrieger.de/gallery/24c3_day3_Protestaktion/http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HinIW6bGxeohttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MEmkrW6pLjE

    24C3: From the diary of a spy
    http://www.heise-security.co.uk/news/101154-- http://annalist.noblogs.org