The Ludic Revolution

Bob Black calls it The Ludic Revolution. It's the only revolution which ever will, or can, work.

Revolution cannot be accomplished by violence. I see nothing morally or essentially wrong with using violence against the economic and political powers that be. If using violence were an effective means of bringing about revolution, I'd be all for it. I do not respect, or even acknowledge, any right to life and property on their part in the least. When they arrogated our rights to life and freedom they forfeited their own, and I am convinced that no one has the right to private property.

I do not advocate violence against the economic and political powers that be simply and only because violence against them won't work. They are better at violence than we.

Moreover, and this is terribly important to understand, as Gustav Landauer wrote, so very insightfully:

"One can throw away a chair and destroy a pane of glass; but those are idle talkers and credulous idolaters of words who regard the state as such a thing or as a fetish that one can smash in order to destroy it. The State is a condition, a certain relationship between human beings, a mode of behavior; we destroy it by contracting other relationships, by behaving differently toward one another - One day it will be realized that socialism is not the invention of anything new but the discovery of something actually present, of something that has grown; We are the state and we shall continue to be the state until we have created the institutions that form a real community and society of men". - Gustav Landauer
"Schwache Stattsmänner, Schwacheres Volk!" ("Weak Statesman, Weaker People!")
Der Sozialist, June 1910

The economic and political powers that be derive their powers from us – from the permission we granted them to usurp our basic rights. They are the distillation of the very worst in us. Violence will not be effective against them. They are far more effective at terrorizing us than we them because it was our fear that created their dominion in the first place.

HR 1955 (S 1959) is legislature aimed at preventing the use of force or violence to effect social change. All legislation designed to regulate and control behavior is centered on the prohibition of force and violence.

Have you ever heard of legislation against laughter?

Love and LAUGHTER conquer fear. They are both orders of magnitude more powerful than fear and when we love and laugh, fear is displaced in us. We become more expansive. We become more creative. We become vastly more powerful.

The economic and political powers that be do not deserve our love. As the ancient Jewish teaching has it: "Those who are compassionate toward the cruel will, in the end, be cruel to the compassionate." The history of Christianity bears out just how true this maxim is.

They are deserving of nothing but our ridicule. They deserve to be laughed at.

We can diminish anything with our laughter.

There is a higher level of laughter than sardonic ridicule and, if we are to effect a revolution, we must reach that level of laughter.

When we can laugh at their funny money; when we can look at their concentration camps and at the double-decker trains equipped with chains and shackles and laugh; when we can laugh at the electronic turnstiles and the cement floors and the barbed wire and the gas pipes and the furnaces they've installed in some of the camps and laugh; when we can laugh at the horrible images the threats of "mental health" camps in Alaska that can hold 2 million people conjure up in our minds; when we can laugh at the fear and disgust they try to induce in us with all the talk of them practicing occult and satanic practices (the photos of the ceremonies they conduct really are ludicrous), when we can laugh *at death itself* – we will have conquered our own minds and emotions and, in so doing, destroyed their hold on us entirely.

The economic and political "powers" are nothing but the reification of the horrors in our own minds and the emotions they arouse. When we conquer our minds and those emotions that hold us prisoner, then and only then will we be free.

Long live The Ludic Revolution!

Great questions posed to me about "The Ludic Revolution", and my, hopefully adequate, answers:

Question: "1) Are the "economic & political powers" in your first paragraph, which you deny the right to life or property, the same ones in your last paragraph, which are in our own minds? If not, what is the relation between the two?"

My answer: They are one and the same.They have, in working to create the conditions for genocide, forfeited their right to life. I do not accept that anyone has the right to private property. Private property allows an amassing of power, which eventually leads to monstrosities like int'l bankers.

However, their monetary and power bases are purely imaginary - fiat money, not backed by gold or any other standard and our attributing power to them.When we attribute to others power that they do not in actuality have, we do most of the work in creating the conditions of our slavery. They have initiated those conditions, true, but we run with the ball when we accept them as authorities and "powers".

Question: "2) If the state can only be changed/replaced by creating "the institutions that form a real community and society" (Landauer´s words, which you quote), then how is conquering our own minds until we can laugh at everything, going to achieve this?"

Answer: Their power is purely fictive, but it is fueled by our fear of them. Laughter is the most powerful antidote to fear.

Question: "3) If violence is impractical in effecting change, doesn´t that make it ethically wrong too? When counter-violence provides a justification for yet greater repression, isn´t it actually supporting the system, and what could be more unethical than that?"

Answer: I define that which is ethically wrong as that which does not foster life and welfare generally. Using violence does as much harm, and sometimes more, to the perpetrator of the violence as it does to the person the violence is inflicted upon. Therefore, it is unethical, as well as ineffective, in my book. It is ineffective because life is not fostered by it and so everything in nature rebels against it.Let's take the Rothschilds. I said they and their minions have forfeited their right to life. But even though that is true, if someone takes their life, they would be debased in so doing. Better to isolate them from what has become the only source of their miserable existence - our fear and our belief that they hold sway over us.

Let's laugh those clowns off the stage of history!

As they equate money and power with life, by our not partaking in their fiat money or recognizing their power, by making laughingstocks of them; they will be effectively deprived of the only sources of life they recognize and we will not be sullied in so doing.

Doreen Ellen Bell-Dotan, Tzfat, Israel
DoreenDotan@gmail.com