This booklet is for people who are dissatisfied with their lives. If  you are happy  with your present existence, we have no argument with  you. However, if you are  tired of waiting for your life to change...   
Tired of waiting for authentic community, love and adventure... 
Tired of waiting for the end of money and forced work... 
Tired of looking for new pastimes to pass the time... 
Tired of waiting for a lush, rich existence... Tired of waiting for a situation  in which you can realise all your desires... 
Tired of waiting for the end of all authorities, alienations, ideologies and moralities... 
...then we think you’ll find what follows to be quite handy. 
I
One of the great secrets of our miserable yet potentially marvellous  time is that  thinking can be a pleasure. This is a manual for  constructing your own self-theory.  Constructing your self-theory is a  revelutionary pleasure, the pleasure of constructing  your self-theory  of revolution.  
Building your self-theory is a destructive/constructive pleasure,  because you are  building a theory-of-practice for the  destructive/constructive transformation of  this society.  
Self-theory is a theory of adventure. It is as erotic and humorous as an authentic  revolution.  
The alienation felt as a result of having had your thinking done for  you by the  ideologies of our day, can lead to the search for the  pleasurable negation of that  alienation: thinking for yourself. It is  the pleasure of making your mind your own.  
Self-theory is the body of critical thought you construct for your own  use. You  construct it and use it when you make an analysis of why your  life is the way it  is, why the world is the way it is. (And ‘thinking’  and ‘feeling’ are inseparable,  since thought comes from subjective,  emotive experience.) You build your self-theory  when you develop a  theory of practice — a theory of how to get what you desire  for your  life.  
Theory will be either a practical theory — a theory of revolutionary  practice  — or it will be nothing... nothing but an aquarium of ideas, a  contemplative  interpretation of the world. The realm of ideals is the  eternal waiting-room of  unrealised desire.  
Those who assume (usually unconsciously) the impossibility of realising  their  life’s desires, and of thus fighting for themselves, usually end  up fighting  for an ideal or cause instead (i.e., the illusion of  selfactivity or self-practice).  Those who know that this is the  acceptance of alienation will now know that all  ideals and causes are  ideologies.   
II
Whenever a system of ideas is structured with an abstraction at the  centre —  assigning a role or duties to you for its sake — this system  is an ideology.  An ideology is a system of false consciousness in which  you no longer function as  the subject in your relation to the world.  
The various forms of ideology are all structured around different  abstractions,  yet they all serve the interests of a dominant (or  aspiring dominant) class by  giving you a sense of purpose in your  sacrifice, suffering and submission.  
Religious ideology is the oldest example, the fantastic projection  called ‘God’  is the Supreme Subject of the cosmos, acting on every  human being as ‘His’ subject.  
In the ‘scientific’ and ‘democratic’ ideologies of bourgeois  enterprise, capital  investment is the ‘productive’ subject directing  world history — the  ‘invisible hand’ guiding human development. The  bourgeoisie had to attack and  weaken the power that religious ideology  once held. It exposed the mystification  of the religious world in its  technological investigation, expanding the realm  of things and methods  out of which it could make a profit.  
The various brands of Leninism are ‘revolutionary’ ideologies in which  their Party  is the rightful subject to dictate world history, by  leading its object —  the proletariat — to the goal of replacing the  bourgeois apparatus with a  Leninist one.  
The many other forms of the dominant ideologies can be seen daily. The  rise of  the new religiomsyticisms serve the dominant structure of  social relations in a  round about way. They provide a neat form in  which the emptiness of daily life  may be obscured, and like drugs, make  it easier to live with. Volunteerism (shoulder  to the wheel) and  determinism (it’ll all work out) prevent us from recognising our  real  place in the functioning of the world. In avant-garde ideology, novelty  in (and  of) itself is what’s important. In survivalism, subjectivity is  preempted by fear  through the invocation of the image of an impending  world catastrophe.  
In accepting ideologies we accept an inversion of subject and object;  things take  on a human power and will, while human beings have their  place as things. Ideology  is upside-down theory. We further accept the  separation between the narrow reality  of our daily life, and the image  of a world totality that’s out of our grasp. Ideology  offers us only a  voyeur’s relationship with the totality.  
In this separation, and this acceptance of sacrifice for the cause,  every ideology  serves to protect the dominant social order. Authorities  whose power depends on  separation must deny us our subjectivity in  order to survive themselves. Such denial  comes in the form of demanding  sacrifices for ‘the common good’, ‘the national interest’,  ‘the war  effort’, ‘the revolution’....   
III
We get rid of the blinders of ideology by constantly asking ourselves... How do I feel?   
Am I enjoying myself? 
How’s my life? 
Am I getting what I want? 
Why not? 
What’s keeping me from getting what I want? 
This is having consciousnessof the commonplace, awareness of one’s  everyday routine.  That Everyday Life — real life — exists, is a public  secret that gets  less secret every day, as the poverty of daily life  gets more and more visible.   
IV
The construction of self-theory is based on thinking for yourself,  being fully  conscious of desires and their validity. It is the  construction of radical subjectivity. 
Authentic ‘consciousness raising’ can only be the ‘raising’ of people’s  thinking  to the level’ of positive (non-guilty) self-consciousness:  developing their basic  subjectivity, free of ideology and imposed  morality in all its forms.  
The essence of what many leftists, therapy-mongers, racism awareness  trainers and  sisterisers term ‘consciousness raising’ is their practice  of beating people into  unconsciousness with their ideological  billyclubs.  
The path from ideology (self-negation) to radical subjectivity  (self-affirmation)  passes through Point Zero, the capital city of  nihilism. This is the windswept still  point in social space and time...  the social limbo wherein which one recognises that  the present is  devoid of life; that there is no life in one’s daily existence. A   nihilist knows the difference between surviving and living.  
Nihilists go through a reversal or perspective on their life and the  world. Nothing  is true for them but their desires, their will to be.  They refuse all ideology in their hatred for the miserable social  relations in modern capitalist-global society. From this reversed  perspective they see with a newly acquired clarity the upside-down world  of reification(i), the inversion of subject and object, of abstract and  concrete. It is the theatrical landscape of fetishised commodities,  mental projections, separations and ideologies: art, God, city planning,  ethics, smile buttons, radio stations that say they love you and  detergents that have compassion for your hands.  
Daily conversation offers sedatives like: “You can’t always get what  you want”,  “Life has its ups and downs”, and other dogmas of the  secular religion of survival.  ‘Common sense’ is just the nonsense of  common alienation. Every day people are denied  an authentic life and  sold back its representation.  
Nihilists constantly feel the urge to destroy the system which destroys  them each  day. They cannot go on living as they are, their minds are  on fire. Soon enough  they run up against the fact that they must come  up with a coherent set of tactics  that will have a practical effect on  the world.  
But if a nihilist does not know of the historical possibility for the  transformation  of the world, his or her subjective rage will coralise  into a role: the suicide, the  solitary murderer, the street hoodlum  vandal, the neo-dadaist, the professional mental  patient... all seeking  compensation for a life of dead time.  
The nihilists’ mistake is that they do not realise that there are  others who are  also nihilists. Consequently they assume that common  communication and participation  in a project of self-realisation is  impossible.   
V
To have a ‘political’ orientation towards one’s life is just to know  that you can  only change your life by changing the nature of life  itself through transfermation  of the world — and that transformation of  the world requires collective effort.  
This project of collective self-realisation can properly be termed  politics. However,  ‘politics’ has become a mystified, separated  category of human activity. Along with  all the other socially enforced  separations of human activity, ‘politics’ has become  just another  interest. It even has its specialists — be they politicians or   politicos. It is possible to be interested (or not) in football, stamp  collecting,  disco music or fashion. What people see as ‘politics’ today  is the social falsification  of the project of collective  self-realisation — and that suits those in power  just fine.  
Collective self-realisation is the revolutionary project. It is the  collective  seizure of the totality of nature and social relations and  their transformation  according to conscious desire.  
Authentic therapy is changing one’s life by changing the nature of  social life.  Therapy must be social if it is to be of any real  consequence. Social therapy (the  healing of society) and individual  therapy (the healing of the individual) are linked  together: each  requires the other, each is a necessary part of the other.  
For example: in spectacular society we are expected to repress our real  feelings  and play a role. This is called ‘playing a part in society’.  (How revealing that  phrase is!) Individuals put on character armour — a  steel-like suit of role playing  is directly related to the end of  social role playing.   
VI
To think subjectively is to use your life — as it is now and as you  want it  to be — as the centre of your thinking. This positive  self-centring is accomplished  by the continuous assault on externals:  all the false issues, false conflicts, false  problems, false identities  and false dichotomies.  
People are kept from analysing the totality of everyday existence by  being asked  their opinion of every detail: all the spectacular trifles,  phoney controversies  and false scandals. Are you for or against trades  unions, cruise missiles, identity  cards... what’s your opinion of soft  drugs, jogging, UFO’s, progressive taxation?  
These are false issues. The only issue for us is how we live.  
There is an old Jewish saying, “If you have only two alternatives, then  choose the  third”. It offers a way of getting the subject to search  for a new perspective on  the problem. We can give the lie to both sides  of a false conflict by taking our  ‘third choice’ — to view the  situation from the perspective of radical  subjectivity.  
Being conscious of the third choice is refusing to choose between two  supposedly  opposite, but really equal, polarities that try to define  themselves as the totality  of a situation. In its simplest form, this  consciousness is expressed by the worker  who is brought to trial for  armed robbery and asked, “Do you plead guilty or not  guilty?”. “I’m  unemployed”, he replies. A more theoretical but equally classic   illustration is the refusal to acknowledge any essential difference  between the  corporate-capitalist ruling classes of the ‘West’ and the  state-capitalist ruling  classes of the ‘East’. All we have to do is  look at the basic social relations of  production in the USA and Europe  on the one hand, and the USSR and China on the  other, to see that they  are essentially the same: over there, as here, the vast  majority go to  work for a wage or salary in exchange for giving up control over  both  the means of production and what they produce (which is then sold back  to  them in the form of commodities).  
In the case of the ‘West’ the surplus value (ie that which is produced  over and  above the value of the workers’ wages) is the property of the  corporate managements  who keep up a show of domestic competition. In  the ‘East’ the surplus value is the  property of the state bureaucracy,  which does not permit domestic competition but  engages in international  competition as furiously as any other capitalist nation.  Big  difference.  
An example of a false problem is that stupid conversational question,  “What’s your  philosophy of life?”. It poses an abstract concept of  ‘Life’ that, despite the word’s  constant appearance in conversation,  has nothing to do with real life, because it  ignores the fact that  ‘living’ is what we are doing at the present moment.  
In the absence of real community, people cling to all kinds of phoney  social  identities, corresponding to their individual role in the  Spectacle (in which  people contemplate and consume images of what life  is, so that they will forget  how to live for themselves). These social  identities can be ethnic (’Italian’),  racial (’Black’), organisational  (’Trade Unionist’), residential (’New Yorker’),  sexual (’Gay’),  cultural (’sports’ fan’), and so on: but all are rooted in a common   desire for affiliation, for belonging.  
Obviously being ‘black’ is a lot more real as an identification than  being a  ‘sports fan’, but beyond a certain point these identities only  serve to mask  our real position in society. Again, the only issue for  us is how we live. Concretely,  this means understanding the reasons for  the nature of one’s life in one’s relation  to society as a whole. To  do this one has to shed all the false identities, the partial   associations, and begin with oneself as the centre. From here we can  examine the material  basis of life, stripped of all mystification.  
For example: suppose I want a cup of coffee from the machine at work.  First of  all, there is the cup of coffee itself: that involves the  workers on the coffee  plantation, the ones on the sugar plantations and  in the refineries, the ones in  the paper mill, and so on. Then you  have all the workers who made the different  parts of the machine and  assembled it. Then the ones who extracted the iron ore  and bauxite,  smelted the steel, drilled the oil and refined it. Then all the  workers  who transported the raw materials and parts over three continents and   two oceans. Then the clerks, typists and communications workers who  co-ordinate  the production and transportation. Finally you have all the  workers who produce  all the other things necessary for the others to  survive. That gives me a direct  material relationship to several  million people: in fact, to the immense majority  of the world’s  population. They produce my life: and I help to produce theirs. In  this  light, all partial group identities and special interests fade into  insignificance.  Imagine the potential enrichment of one’s life that is  presently locked up in the  frustrated creativity of those millions of  workers, held back by obsolete and exhausting  methods of production,  strangled by alienation, warped by the insane rationale of  capital  accumulation! Here we begin to discover a real social identity: in  people  all over the world who are fighting to win back their lives, we  find ourselves.  
We are constantly being asked to choose between two sides in a false  conflict.  Governments, charities and propagandists of all kinds are  fond of presenting us  with choices that are no choice at all (eg the  Central Electricity Generating  Board presented its nuclear programme  with the slogan ‘Nuclear Age or Stone Age’.  The CEGB would like us to  believe that these are the only two alternatives —  we have the illusion  of choice, but as long as they control the choices we perceive  as  available to us, they also control the outcome).  
The new moralists love to tell those in the rich West how they will  ‘have to make  sacrifices’, how they ‘exploit the starving children of  the Third World’. The choice  we are given is between sacrificial  altruism or narrow individualism. (Charities  cash in on the resulting  guilt by offering us a feeling of having done something,  in exchange  for a coin in the collecting tin.) Yes, by living in the rich West we   do exploit the poor of the Third World — but not personally, not  deliberately.  We can make some changes in our life, boycott, make  sacrifices, but the effects are  marginal. We become aware of the false  conflict we are being presented with when we  realise that under this  global social system we, as individuals, are as locked in  our global  role as ‘exploiters’ as others are in their global role as the  exploited.  We have a role in society, but little or no power to do  anything about it. We reject  the false choice of ‘sacrifice or  selfishness’ by calling for the destruction of the  global social system  whose existence forces that decision upon us. It isn’t a case  of  tinkering with the system, of offering token sacrifices or calling for  ‘a little  less selfishness’. Charities and reformers never break out of  the terrain of the  false choice.  
Those who have a vested interest in maintaining the present situation  constantly  drag us back to their false choices — that is, any choice  which keeps their  power intact. With myths like ‘If we shared it all  out there wouldn’t be enough  to go round’, they attempt to deny the  existence of any other choices and to hide  from us the fact that the  material preconditions for social revolution already  exist.  
VII
Any journey towards self-demystification must avoid those two quagmires  of lost  thought — absolutism and cynicism; twin swamps that camouflage  themselves  as meadows of subjectivity.  
Absolutism is the total acceptance or rejection of all components of  particular  ideologies, spectacles and reifications. An absolutist  cannot see any other choice  than complete acceptance or complete  rejection .  
The absolutist wanders along the shelves of the ideological supermarket  looking  for the ideal commodity, and then buys it — lock, stock and  barrel. but the  ideological supermarket — like any supermarket — is fit  only for looting.  It is more productive for us if we can move along  the shelves, rip open the packets,  take out what looks authentic and  useful, and dump the rest.  
Cynicism is a reaction to a world dominated by ideology and morality.  Faced with  conflicting ideologies the cynic says: “a plague on both  your houses”. The cynic is  as much a consumer as the absolutist, but  one who has given up hope of ever finding  the ideal commodity.  
VIII
The process of dialectical thinking is constructive thinking, a process  of continually  synthesising one’s current body of self- theory with  new observations and appropriations;  a resolution of the contradictions  between the previous body of theory and new  theoretical elements. The  resulting synthesis is thus not some quantitative summation  of the  previous and the new, but their qualitative supersession, a new  totality.  
This synthetic / dialectic method of constructing a theory is counter  to the eclectic  style which just collects a rag-bag of its favourite  bits from favourite ideologies  without ever confronting the resulting  contradictions. Modern examples include  libertarian capitalism,  christian marxism and liberalism in general.  
If we are continually conscious of how we want to live, we can  critically appropriate  from anything in the construction of our  self-theory: ideologies, culture critics,  technocratic experts,  sociological studies, mystics and so forth. All the rubbish  of the old  world can be scavenged for useful material by those who desire to   reconstruct it.  
IX
The nature of modern society, its global and capitalist unity,  indicates to us  the necessity of making our self-theory a unitary  critique. By this we mean a  critique of all geographic areas where  various forms of socio-economic domination  exist (ie both the  capitalism of the ‘free’ world and the state-capitalism of the   ‘communist’ world), as well as a critique of all alienations (sexual  poverty,  enforced survival, urbanism, etc). In other words, a critique  of the totality of  daily existence everywhere, from the perspective of  the totality of one’s desires.  
Ranged against this project are all the politicians and bureaucrats,  preachers and  gurus, city planners and policemen, reformers and  militants, central committees and  censors, corporate managers and union  leaders, male supremacists and feminist  ideologues,  psyche-sociologists and conservation capitalists who work to subordinate   individual desire to a reified ‘common good’ that has supposedly  designated them as  its representatives. They are all forces of the old  world, all bosses, priests and  creeps who have something to lose if  people extend the game of seizing back their  minds into seizing back  their lives.  
Revolutionary theory and revolutionary ideology are enemies — and both know  it.  
X
By now it should be obvious that self-demystification and the  construction of  our own revolutionary theory doesn’t eradicate our  alienation: ‘the world’ (capital  and the Spec tacle) goes on,  reproducing itself every day.  
Although this booklet had the construction of self-theory as its focus,  we never  intended to imply that revolutionary theory can exist  separate from revolutionary  practice. In order to be consequential,  effectively to reconstruct the world,  practice must seek its theory,  and theory must be realised in practice. The revolutionary  prospect of  disalienation and the transformation of social relations requires that   one’s theory be nothing other than a theory of practice, of what we do  and how we  live. Otherwise theory will degenerate into an impotent  contemplation of the world,  and ultimately into survival ideology — a  projected mental fogbank, a static  body of reified thought, of  intellectual armour, that acts as a buffer between the  daily world and  oneself. And if revolutionary practice is not the practice of   revolutionary theory, it degenerates into altruistic militantism,  ‘revolutionary’  activity as one’s social duty.  
We don’t strive for a coherent theory purely as an end in itself. For  us, the  practical use value of coherence is that having a coherent  self-theory makes it  easier for someone to think. As an example, it’s  easier to get a handle on future  developments in social control if you  have a coherent understanding of modern social  control ideologies and  techniques up to the present.  
Having a coherent theory makes it easier to conceive of the theoretical practice  for realising your desires for your life.  
XI
In the process of constructing self-theory, the last ideologies that  have to be  wrestled with and determinedly pinned down are the ones that  most closely resemble  revolutionary theory. These final mystifications  are a) situationism b)councilism.  
The Situationist International (1958-1971) was an international  revolutionary  organisation that made an immense contribution to  revolutionary theory. Situationist  theory is a body of critical theory  that can be appropriated into one’s self-theory,  and nothing more.  Anything more is the ideological misappropriation known as situationism.   
For those who newly discover it, SI theory has a way of seeming like  ‘the answer  I’ve been searching for for years’, the answer to the  riddle of one’s dead life.  But that’s exactly when a new alertness and  self-possession become necessary.  Situationism can be quite the  complete survival ideology, a defence mechanism  against the wear and  tear of daily life. included in the ideology is the spectacular   commodity-role of being ‘a situationist’, ie a radical jade and ardent  esoteric.  
Councilism (aka ‘Workers’ Control’, ‘Syndicalism’) offers ‘self-  management’  as a replacement for the capitalist system of production.  
Real self-management is the direct management (unmediated by any  separate  leadership) of social production, distribution and  communication by workers and  their communities. The movement for  self-management has appeared again and again  all over the world in the  course of social revolution. Russia in 1905 and 1917-21,  Spain in  1936-7, Hungary in 1956, Algeria in 1960, Chile in 1972 and Portugal in   1975. The form of organisation most often created in the practice of  self-management  has been workers’ councils: sovereign general  assemblies of the producers and  neighbourhoods that elect mandated  delegates to co-ordinate their activities. The  delegates are not  representatives, but carry out decisions already made by their   assemblies. Delegates can be recalled at any time, should the general  assembly feel  that its decisions are not being rigorously carried out.  
Councilism is this historical practice and theory of self- management  turned  into an ideology. Whereas the participants in these uprisings  lived a critique  of the social totality, beginning with a critique of  wage labour, of the commodity  economy and exchange value, councilism  makes a partial critique: it seeks not  the self-managed, continuous and  qualitative transformation of the whole world,  but the static,  quantitive self-management of the world as it is. The economy  thus  remains a separate realm cut off from the rest of daily life and  dominating  it. On the other hand a movement for generalised self-  management seeks the  transformation of all sectors of social life and  all social relations (production,  sexuality, housing, services,  communications, etc), councilism thinks that a  self-managed economy is  all that matters. It misses, literally, the whole point:  subjectivity  and the desire to transform the whole of life. The problem with   workers’ control is that all it controls is work.  
The world can only be turned right-side-up by the conscious collective  activity  of those who construct a theory of why it is upside-down.  Spontaneous rebellion  and insurrectionary subjectivity alone are not  sufficient. An authentic revolution  can only occur in a practical  movement in which all the mystifications of the  past are being  consciously swept away.   
Post-notes
This booklet is part of the collective  self-theory of the members of  our organization.  It is the statement of what we call our meta-theory,  our theory of the practice  of theory-making.  
The preparation and dissemination of The Minimum Definition  of  Intelligence is undertaken for the same reason we do everything else we   do: because we want to catalyze a social revolution that will transform  the present  static layout of alienation into a moving landscape of  realized dreams. We know we  can only create the lives that we want tin  the process of everyone else creating  the lives that they want. We are  revolutionaries because our desires require a  social revolution for  their realization.  
The world can only be turned right-side-up by the conscious collective  activity  of those who construct a theory of why it is upside-down.  Spontaneous rebellion  and insurrectionary subjectivity alone are not  sufficient. An authentic revolution  can only occur in a practical  movement in which all the mystifications of the past  are consciously  being swept away.   
Preamble
We have woken up to discover that our lives are becoming unliveable.  From boring,  meaningless jobs to the humiliation of waiting endlessly  in lines, at desks and  counters to receive our share of survival, from  prison-like schools to repetitious,  mindless “entertainment,” from  desolate and crime-ridden streets to the stifling  isolation of home,  our days are a treadmill on which we run faster and faster  just to keep  in the same place.  
Like the immense majority of the population, we have no control over  the use to  which our lives are put: we are people who have nothing to  sell but our capacity  to work. We have come together because we can no  longer tolerate the way we are  forced to exist, we can no longer  tolerate being squeezed dry of our energies,  being used up and thrown  away, only to create a world that grows more alien and  ugly every day.  
The system of Capital, whether in its “Western” private-corporate or   “Eastern” state-bureaucratic form, was brutal and exploitative even  during its  ascent: now, where it is in decay, it poisons air and water,  produces goods  and services of deteriorating quality, and is less and  less able to employ us  even to its own advantage. Its logic of  accumulation and competition leads  inexorably toward its own collapse.  Even as it links all the people of the  world together in one vast  network of production and consumption, it isolates  us from each other;  even as it stimulates greater and greater advances in  technology and  productive power, it finds itself incapable of putting them to  use:  even as it multiplies the possibilities for human self-realization, we  find  ourselves strangled in layers of guilt, fear and self-contempt.   
But it is we ourselves — our strength, our intelligence, our  creativity,  our passions-that are the greatest productive power of all.  It is we who  produce and reproduce the world as it is, in the image of  Capital; it is we who  reinforce in each other the conditioning of  family, school, church and media,  the conditioning that keeps us  slaves. When we decide together to end our  misery, to take our lives  into our own hands, we can recreate the world the  way we want it. The  technical resources and worldwide productive network  developed under  the old system give us the means: the crisis and continuing  collapse of  that system give us the chance and the urgent need.   
The ruling ideologies of the world superpowers, with their interlocking   sets of lies, offer us only the false choice of “Communism” versus   “Capitalism”. But in the history of revolution during this century  (Russia,  1905; Germany, 1919-20; Spain, 1936-37; Hungary, 1956) we have  discovered  the general form through which we can take back power over  our own lives:  workers’councils. At their highest moments these  councils were popular  assemblies in workplaces and communities, joined  together by means of  strictly mandated delegates who carried out  decisions already made by their  assemblies and who could be  recalled by them at any time. The councils  organized their nwn defense  and restarted production under their own  management. By now, through a  system of councils at the local, regional, and  global level, using  modern telecommunications and data processing, we can  coordinate and  plan world production as well as be free to shape our own  immediate  environment. Any compromise with bureaucracy and official  heirarchy,  anything short of the total power of workers’ councils, can only   reproduce misery and alienation in a new form, as a good look at the  so-called  “Communist” countries will show. For this reason, no  political party can  represent the revolutionary movement or seize power  “on its behalf”, since  this would be simply a change of ruling  classes, not their abolition. The plan  of the freely associated  producers is in absolute opposition to the dictatorial  Plan of state  and corporate production. Only all of us together can decide  what is best for us.   
For these reasons, we call upon you and upon all the hundreds of   millions like you and us, to join us in the revolutionary transformation  of  every aspect of life. We want to abolish the system of wage and  salaried  labor, of commodity exchange-value and of profit, of corporate  and  bureaucratic power. We want to decide the nature and conditions of   everything we do, to manage all social life collectively and  democratically.  We want to end the division of mental from manual work  and of “free” time  from work time, by bringing into play all our  abilities for enjoyable creative  activity. We want the whole world to  be our conscious self-creation, so that  our days are full of wonder,  learning, and pleasure. Nothing less.   
In setting down this minimum program, we are not trying to impose an   ideal on reality, nor are we alone in wanting what we want. Our ideas  are  already in everyone’s minds, consciously or unconsciously, because  they are  nothing but an expression of the real movement that exists all over the  planet. But in order to win, this movement must know itself, its aims, and its  enemies, as never before.   
We do not speak for this movement, but for ourselves as of it. We   recognize no Cause over and above ourselves. But our selves are already   social: the whole human race produces the life of each one of  its members,  now more than ever before. Our aim is simply to make this  process conscious  for the first time, to give to the production of  human life the imaginative  intensity of a work at art.   
It is in this spirit that we call upon you to organize, as we are  doing,  where you work and where you live, to begin planning the way we  can run  society together, to defend yourselves against the deepening  misery that is  being imposed on all of us. We call upon you to assault  actively the lies, the  self-deceptions born of fear, that keep everyone  frozen in place while the  world is falling apart around us. We call  upon you to link up with us and with  others who are doing the same  thing. Above all, we call upon you to take  yourselves and your desires  seriously, to realize your own power to master  your own lives.   
It’s now or never. If we are to have a future, we ourselves must be that  future.  
FOR OURSELVES! 
 
1 comment:
Thanks greaat blog
Post a Comment