rage against the machine may be neither my favourite band/style or constitute the most impressive political statements I can imagine but I am massively impressed by their capacity to say something [anything] in effective ways on topics that matter to me
mediocre seems excessively dismissive
and to see admiration of che as utterly counter to the desirable cause well somehow it seems to me to miss the point i can see the compromise but admiring che is so much better than admiring so many much more frequently admired people
and so on and so forth i'm sure you get my point
Catherine
[i know, yoshie, i can't read and i'm insufficiently logical, let's just take that as a given and move on shall we]
----- Original Message ----- From: Doug Henwood <dhenwood at panix.com> Date: Monday, February 26, 2001 4:49 am Subject: Re: worlds collide
> Chuck0 wrote:
>
> >Doug Henwood wrote:
> >
> >> The march itself was also an open display of pluralism. There were
> >> Brazilian communists with hammer-and-sickle banners; a little
> group>> of drag queens with Lurex jump suits, parasols and lights
> flashing on
> >> their belts; anarchists on stilts dressed in black and bearing
> >> banners with "Rage against the Machine" stenciled over a
> portrait of
> >> Che.
> >
> >These can't be anarchists. No self-respecting anarchist would be
> caught>dead carrying around a picture of Che, not to mention anything
> >glorifying that mediocre Leftist band RATM.
>
> Agreed on the mediocrity of RATM, but you could read the stencil
> over
> his portrait as identifying him as part of the raged-against
> machine.
> That would be anarchic, no?
>
> Doug
>