Страница 20 из 98

A Call for armed insurrection

Now that I have exposed bourgeois propaganda, it is possible to describe the rules of propaganda of the revolutionary.

The first rule of revolutionary propaganda is to tell people what they want to hear from you. Perhaps it will seem stupid to you, and perhaps – that is banal. Some will think that this is a departure from the principles of propaganda That I have proclaimed before. All this, of course, is not true. In fact, this rule is based on the principles of dialectical materialism. First of all, existence, and consciousness is secondary. This means that our ideas and ideas are based on the conditions of our daily lives. Moreover, our ideas are defined by our living conditions. Therefore, the most effective propaganda is propaganda that meets the needs of the masses. This is often the case: the agitator comes to the village and starts there about dialectic, about Althusser, about the «new left» bend. And people don't listen to him. They don't know Althusser now. They have a lot of problems without it: the salary is small, there is no ru

So the first principle is now clear to you. Let's move on to the second one. Art, as we know, expresses thecommon ality through private. This is it's historical strength and purpose. Chekhov's play «The Cherry Orchard» shows us the process of ruining Russian landowners. Through a private case, that is, through a case that happened to one family – Chekhov shows exactly the process that affected many families, and this is already common. So, through private – to express the common. That's the purpose of art! Propaganda is also in some way an art form, and a revolutionary art. Very progressive art! So you need to learn to express the common ality through private. Do it clearly and so that not in the eyebrow, and in the eye. In the official's eye. Here, for example, are the statistics. Statistics are, of course, necessary and useful. Moreover, the statistics work wonderfully in propaganda, but not always. The fact is that all statistics should be provided with the necessary commentary. In this very comment you are obliged to give a class point of view. It should explain to the reader the meaning of these statistics, explain that our situation is difficult or, on the contrary, remarkable. But it is possible to act by the methods of art. For example, you need to talk about the ruin of the middle class in Russia. You can give statistics and so on, or you can tell a story. It will be a rather sentimental story about one Russian family. This family was quite well-off, but gradually completely impoverished and sank. People don't like to read statistical reports, but here are interesting stories they love. That's why I advise you to tell such stories more often. Of course, they will not replace statistics, but it is possible and necessary to use them as propaganda materials. That's understandable. Well, that's understandable.

Now we will talk about the third principle of our propaganda. I told you that we need to teach a person to think, to free his mind from illusions. All this, of course, is very good, but it is very difficult to achieve it. We need to encourage people to think on their own. It is only through provocation that he can be encouraged to think on his own. Yes, i'm talking about what the situationists used to be doing. Of course, it is possible to criticize situationalism indefinitely, but we must remember that it's followers have created good methods of struggle. Of course, these methods are far from all-powerful. Moreover, if mishandled, they become useless, but if we combine them skillfully with other means of struggle, it will be of great benefit to us. We have to make scandals all the time. To do this, however, we need to find out: that in the end there is a scandal, that in the end there is a provocation. Although no, let's not say «scandal» or «provocation». We will say «acts of a provocative nature». These are actions aimed at causing the reaction of our enemy. The best example here will be the action «Pussy Riot» in the temple. This action with dancing in the church was needed only to cause a reaction of clerics. That's why they organized it, so that the churchmen began to tear and throw. That's what I'm talking about now. We should organize such actions, which would cause the reaction of the authorities. If you want to become some notable phenomenon, then you need to do things unusual. Therefore, all actions should be exactly that unusual, opposing daily life. If they are immoral, cynical, cruel and nasty to public morals, such actionswill invariably be discussed. In this respect, we can determine that provocative actions are actions aimed at causing any reaction to them from our enemies. The actions of unusual, contrary to social norms of law and morality are suitable for provocation. They've dealt with it. Now I have to explain to you the essence of modern morality. Some right-wingers argue that there is no public morality at all. This is, of course, complete nonsense. Morality will exist as long as only class society exists. Of course, morality can change. In the nineteenth century, for example, public morality allowed both racism and nationalism. Although no, the word «allowed» would be incorrect. «Allowed» can be said about the variety of the norm. The morality of the time postulated racism and nationalism as the only version of the norm. Yes, then you had to be both a nationalist, a racist, and a patriot just to be a normal person. At the same time, it was completely unacceptable to be a homosexual, a, a narrow-eyed or a communist in those days. If people knew in the nineteenth century that you were a homosexual or a communist, they would at best stop saying hello to you. At worst, you would have been killed. These days, everything has become accurate, but vice versa. Now to be a, a homosexual or a life-and-a-half is an honor. At the same time, racism and nationalism are marginalized. If your boss at work finds out that you're a Nazi, a bon, a racist or something like that, he's not thinking you're going to be kicked out of work. Now you can't say in a decent society that you're a racist and want to kill all the. But what's the big deal? Yes, morale has changed. Homosexuality used to be immoral, but racism was then in honor. Now it's the other way around. But I haven't said the most important thing yet: capitalism from this at least what! Morale has changed radically, while the power of capital continues to stand. That's why I have to explain something else to you. Some of the «new left» thought that there was some special capitalist morality. By it they understood some caricatured Puritan and sanctimonious morality of the Anglo-American type. In fact, it turned out that capitalism does not know any morality at all. Moreover, capitalism ca