Date: Mon, 21 Sep 1998 14:45:27 +1000 (EST)
Subject: Re: AUT: Identity, Zapatismo, Reeve


John Holloway wrote:

>        This is a very belated comment on the Reeve debate, stimulated by a
>challenge in the editorial of Wildcat 45. It is a note written for Wildcat,
>but I thought it should be posted here as well.
>
>        John

Loved it! Very provocative, let's see, what shall I file that under... ;-)

Seriously though, the tendency you criticise is merely an extension of the
human urge to look for order in the world about us. It is how we try to
understand things. And once having discerned what order we can, it can be
very disconcerting to have some phenomenon arise which claims to be "new",
something which deliberately frustrates your need to classify things.

Having read some of these "communiques" from Marcos myself I feel not a
little sympathy for such annoyance. I can discern no meaning from them at
all, it is an understandable strategy to avoid being classified, but I am
tempted to put such people into the "trying to be all things to all people"
category, rather than the "not trying to be anything to anyone" category.

My reasoning is that if you don't want to be anything to anyone, you would
not feel the need to issue a communique in the first place. Nothing wrong
with that, so long as you don't try to be all things to all men under false
pretenses, that is by implying you are something you are not. Or even by
not telling us what you are.

If you issue a communique composed entirely of vague and incomprehensible
gibberish that tell precisely nothing, at least nothing unambiguous, I
classify you as a fraud. You might be a loveable fraud, or even a fraud
with honourable intent, but you are still a fraud.

Bill Bartlett
Bracknell Tas




     --- from list aut-op-sy-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---