Author Tags: Politics


Articles: 2 Articles for this author

---

The story of this book starts with the coining of the term "mutual acquiescence."; It first appeared as part of a single sentence in a 2006 thought piece that I wrote for Green Anarchy magazine under the title of "Why Misery Loves Company"; in which I stated: "What I call mutual acquiescence is the polar opposite of the anarchist concept of mutual aid in that it paralyzes revolt rather than facilitating it";...

To be clear from the start, I did not create the term mutual acquiescence as part of a doom and gloom scenario of despair in which misery rules our lives, but as a way of understanding why and how people become immersed in the dead end of believing that misery is the only reality. The latter "realistic"; state of mind is what surrealists call miserabilism. I see the relevance of the concept of mutual acquiescence here as bringing the historical connection between surrealism and anarchy into the present moment. For my part, the operative idea was that if we could understand the contemporary phenomenon of mutual acquiescence, we could begin to figure out how to transform its socially ingrained relationships of subservience into vibrant ones of mutual aid. I had no illusions that accomplishing such a task would be an easy one in practice, but assumed that the crossroads of mutual acquiescence and mutual aid would offer us a place to start in that journey toward anarchy...

However, I did not want the title to inadvertently lead to the depressing conclusion that mutual acquiescence made the realization of anarchy impossible. Instead, it needed a dynamic title that would make it clear that in order for the flowing waters of mutual aid to run freely, the dam of mutual acquiescence must be destroyed. Rather than simply blaming all of our woes on the state or capitalism, we can begin the processes of individual and social transformation by understanding the toxic nature of the everyday social relationships that prevent us from breaking loose.
If there is any subtext to this book, written in between the lines is the idea that we all hold a piece of the puzzle called anarchy. In so saying, I do not mean to oversimplify the profoundly complex differences between anarchist ideas from individualist to communitarian ones and from those which prize negation to those that emphasize affirmation. Rather, it is my contention that we need to recognize anarchy as a mosaic rich with diversity and not let any of the internal theoretical contradictions therein make us forget what we have in common. Together in mutual aid and as individuals in revolt, we can take back our lives. We can break loose from the dead weight of mutual acquiescence and set sail for the beckoning shores of anarchy.

Ron Sakolsky

---

Some people prefer to read newspapers and magazines from back to front. They would be ideal readers for Ron Sakolsky's awkwardly brilliant Breaking Loose: Mutual Acquiescence or Mutual Aid? (Little Black Cart Books $8).

At the tail end of Sakolsky's erudite but dense meditations, the Denman Island anarchist describes an event that occurred in the New York subway in 2012 that set him thinking about where we are headed as a species.

"A man ended up on the tracks in the path of an oncoming train. Bystanders on the platform, instead of acting to rescue him, whipped out their smart-phones and cameras to record the event for their Facebook pages.";

With his inveterate knack for preferring overlong sentences that sometimes blur his content, the New York-born Sakolsky posits, "The disposable digital camera posts that have increasingly replaced real-time relationships based upon mutual aid with a superficial Facebook connectedness have caused in-depth cooperative interactions to suffer a profound loss.";

The key words in that paragraph are mutual aid, arising from Peter Kropotkin's 1902 book in response to social Darwinism (ie. Dog-eat-dog capitalism), Mutual Aid: A Factor of Evolution. It inspired the likes of Kropotkin biographer George Woodcock to write his definitive work, Anarchism, to explain why anarchist philosophy has precious little to do with bomb throwing and more to do with interpersonal responsibility.

Still with us? The 2012 subway incident reminded Sakolsky of an incident when he was on his way to Brooklyn. It was 3 a.m. on a weekday morning. The lower Manhattan platform was empty.
"Looking across the lines of tracks while waiting for my train,"; he writes, "I saw an apparently drunken man, who had been tottering along on the farthest platform, inadvertently stumble onto tracks below.

"Without a moment's hesitation, I was in motion, running up and down stairways at full speed to get to the spot where he had fallen.";

He could hear the sound of a train coming. He reached down to grab the man's upturned hand, pulling him onto the platform just before the train swept into the station.
"Aware that I had saved him from certain death, he kissed my hand with tears of gratitude rolling down his cheeks.

"Sitting him down safely on a nearby bench, I returned to my own platform to catch a train back home. At the time, I distinctly remember feeling wide-awake and brilliantly alive, whereas previous to my encounter with him, I had been sleepy and somewhat despondent.";
Now here comes the good bit.

"In a certain sense, it was he who had saved me. I had been rescued from the despair of an atomized existence. The natural human capacity for mutual aid had kicked in, and I had taken direct action.

"It was not an act of heroism on my part, but an inherent act of human solidarity.";

Lots of people commit suicide in New York City by imitating Anna Karenina, by jumping in front of a train.

Sakolsky had assumed the man was ill or drunk. Only when the man raised his hand towards him did it become clear to him that this man was not intending to commit suicide, that he had fallen and wanted to be saved.

It was a moment of spiritual re-birth, one that has served Sakolsky as a source of reverie ever since he literally lent a helping hand. He had peered down onto the tracks, "expecting to see the face of a stranger, but instead saw myself looking back up at me.";
The goal of Breaking Loose: Mutual Acquiescence or Mutual Aid? is to expand upon ideas Sakolsky first broached in an article for Green Anarchy magazine in 2006 called 'Why Misery Loves Company.' That piece gave rise to his term 'mutual acquiescence.'
Sakolsky refined his thoughts for a 2011 conference, but he was uncomfortable with the notion that his thoughts might languish in what he calls 'the academic ghetto.' He consequently re-jigged the piece as 'Mutual Aquiescence or Mutual Aid' for the inaugural issue of Modern Slavery.

"I did not create the term mutual acquiescence as part of a doom and gloom scenario of despair,"; he writes, "in which misery rules our lives, but as a way of understanding why and how people become immersed in the dead end of believing that misery is the only reality.";

Sakolsky is a sincere intellectual who writes with a passion to uplift; not destroy. His inspirational rhetoric emphasizes the value of pushing the envelope. He cites examples of modern activists who are doing so, such as the Zapatistas in Mexico or a hodge-podge of protesters in the French countryside called Zone to Defend who have established an encampment at the site of a proposed second airport for the nearby city of Nantes to be built by the Vinci corporation.
Closer to home, he praises the bravado of indigenous resistance from the First Nations Unist'ot'en clan "in response to the voracious appetite of the colonial megamachine."; You don't have to agree with his politics to enjoy some of the high octane ingenuity of his prose.

"Though the terrain of battle is localized, these struggles exude a 'war of the worlds' ethos,"; he writes, "that counters the perpetual crisis management/state of emergency/anti-terrorist/counter-insurgency initiatives of governmental control in a google-eyed cybernetic age of endless apocalypse and perpetual surveillance with a land-based corporeal presence that is rooted in the visceral art of nurturing revolutionary becomings.";
Okay, don't expect to see Ron Sakolsky invited to speak at any government-sponsored writers festivals. He seeks to wake us up, to inspire acts of revolt, to rage against the machine. It's not an act. It's a challenge to act.

"Whether we are locked securely in the gilded cages of consumerism, or are bouncing around contentedly in a technological bubble of recuperation; we are increasingly rendered inert... If we rebel, we often place reformist limits on our rebellion in the name of realism instead of inspiring each other to pursue our dreams of breaking loose.
"Whether we cast off the chains of mutual acquiescence among friends and accomplices or in larger rebel groupings, breaking loose and mutual aid tend to go hand in hand.
"Relations of mutual aid can reinforce our individual refusals, and together we can create unmapped zones of inspiration where we are encouraged to keep the wrecking ball of resistance rolling merrily along in the direction of creating anarchy.

"Rather than playing the mobilizing game of waiting for technological innovation to save us or expecting a revolutionary messiah to come forth who will lead the faithful to a heaven on earth, inspirational acts of revolt can sustain us in the upheaval of the here and now and spur us on to future revolutionary endeavours.";

Contact Little Black Cart Books at:
info@littleblackcart.com
BCBW (Spring 2016)