Individuals who work within the government or are employed by the government may have rights, but no more than any other individual. This makes the actions of many of the states employees criminal by the very nature of their jobs. Marines and Soldiers often engage in murder and invasion. They justify this by stating that the non-individual ‘the state’ is responsible. What is the state? It is nothing more than these individuals acting in a criminal manner to assert force and control over other human beings. If a gangster claims they have the right to murder because the gang they belong to calls for this murder, do we accept that as a justified?
Police by the nature of their job simply defend the will of the state with force. They partake in what would be seen outside of the context of the state as extortion, theft, murder, assault and kidnapping on a daily basis. This is simply justified by stating ‘they were just doing their job.’ Even the youngest elementary school child is taught this is wrong. “Would you jump off a bridge if Jimmy told you to?” We learn that just because someone tells us to do something it is not justified. Somehow statist apologetics seem to defy those simple ethics.
These people who have committed crimes against humanity under the titles the government provides them would still exist in a system without government. The aim of eliminating government can be seen as an aim to end the unethical nature of the state. By eliminating the crux of the state which is the power of the Police and Military that uses force to obtain it’s will and command over others. The average person sees these as necessities for order. To bring up alternatives for order in a more ethical manner tends to bring up doomsday scenarios and a debate that compares anarchism to a certain utopia they have even failed to obtain through their force. As an anarchist I do not seek utopia, but to reject a system that is every bit as criminal as what it claims to oppose. I seek to oppose hierarchy, power over others and oppression. To claim that we must accept oppression on one level to avoid oppression on another level is inaccurate. This returns to the statist mindset that in order to end crime we must also partake in those crimes under the title of ‘Police.’ I am not asking for oppression or crime on any level, rather pointing at how we accept it on one level for a ‘greater good’ justified by ‘the will of the people’ or the ‘divine rights of kings.’
If you have faith in these people to keep order and to find solutions with coercion why then do you not believe that this order can not be found outside of criminal means?
Those in the state that seek to keep order are just people. Individual human beings preforming a job under a misguided ethic. Once we have eliminated the hierarchy and oppression of the state it will still be people or individuals in non-coercive entities and through voluntary means providing similar services. There is a misunderstanding that somehow order is only found with these people if the state exists. The only tool for order is often seen as the state. This is partially because the state has educated us to believe such. Individuals have a difficult time perceiving a system outside of the systems that they have always known.
I am not one to say that a Dispute Resolution Organization (DRO) or Voluntary Contractual Arrangements are the definitive answer. In a truly non-coercive system we would see all and more. We would see amalgams of these as well as other concepts for protection defense and order. To state that we must choose one is the flaw of the statist. I n a truly liberated society I am not forced to choose between Mutualism, Anarcho-Syndicalism and Anarcho Capitalism, but I am free to join in the systems of order I find most effective or appropriate. To cling to only one is the way of the state. This keeps the flaws of the system choose also with no option and no way out.
Society like the government is not an individual or an entity with rights to supersede the rights of the individual. Society however is a reality. We may each be individuals with rights but we often find we are interdependent. This interdependence creates society, markets, syndicates and all forms of interaction. To say that one solution is sufficient for all needs is to oversimplify reality. To embrace anarchism is to embrace the reality that there is no one perfect way to interact and to embrace that there are flaws in systems. To embrace the state is to embrace one way that is believed to be the only solution and to enforce that belief and way upon others.
In closing I will state that to reject the state is not to stand in opposition to order or to ignore problems that exist, but to embrace the reality that there is no one way that will be the answer to all. We embrace that fact that people can bring solutions and that they should not be disregarded because they do not lead to utopia.
CURTAIN CALL CHRISTO, WIFE JEANNE-CLAUDE UNFURL COLORADO ENCORE ‘OVER THE RIVER’.(Spotlight)
Rocky Mountain News (Denver, CO) August 6, 2005 | Chandler, Mary Voelz Byline: Mary Voelz Chandler, Rocky Mountain News Many Coloradans have been introduced to Christo and wife Jeanne-Claude in recent weeks as the artists begin the process to mount Over the River.
But for others, the project brings back memories of one of the couple’s first giant projects in the United States – a Colorado event that attracted worldwide notice.
Valley Curtain – a pinkish-orange swath of fabric twice strung between the cliffs of Rifle Gap, and twice shattered by the wind – was made in the era of earthworks, when artists such as this pair began to turn to the land as a canvas.
The Bulgarian-born Christo, who had lived in New York since 1964 with his Algerian-born wife Jeanne Claude, at that point was known for smaller installation projects. Then came the bold strokes of Museum of Contemporary Art, Wrapped, Chicago, in 1968-69, and Wrapped Coast, Little Bay, Australia, a 1969 piece in which he used one million square feet of material to cover a section of that country’s shoreline.
Christo turned to the West for Curtain, a project that, like Over the River, stirred debate over the environment, public process, community interest and, yes, just what is art.
Simpler process “It was an expansionary view of art, a mind blower,” said Jan van der Marck, a noted writer and former museum director who was project manager on both Valley Curtain projects.
Van der Marck, who lives in suburban Detroit after running the Detroit Institute of Art for several years, became close to the artists when he put his job on the line by asking them to wrap the old Chicago museum building in 10,000 square feet of canvas.
He became Curtain project director after he left the Chicago job, and was doing consulting. “I jumped at the occasion. I was the front man, dealt with the governor.” The post was pro bono, “but I got a nice collage or two. It was nice on both ends.” It also was a more simple process than today, when it’s estimated it will take three or four years more for River to wend its way to reality.
The first Valley Curtain attempt came in October 1971, about eight months after Van der Marck and Christo approached Colorado officials about the project. Van der Marck had the blessing of then-Western Slope Rep. Wayne Aspinall, and approached Gov. John Love, who delegated the meeting to Lt. Gov. John Vanderhoof.
Love’s response was skeptical, according to news stories of the time: “It doesn’t appear to me as a great work of art.” The project did not get official endorsement, but it was on privately leased land. “I’m not prepared to fight it, but I’m not too carried away with it,” Love was quoted as saying later. detroitinstituteofartsnow.net detroit institute of arts
The Colorado Department of Transportation got involved because the curtain was to hang over a road, Colorado 325. The solution: build an arched opening for cars and cattle.
About 2,150 people lived in Rifle then.
“The people in Rifle went wild when it happened,” said van der Marck. “They became such fans in an endearing way.” Headaches of a different kind If getting the OK to do the project was simpler, so was the entire operation.
“There was a bevy of ironworkers, a dozen or 15 or so,” said van der Marck. “We knew them all, we were all going to the same two bars. In 1972, it was quite marginal. Today, (Christo’s projects are) almost like a big business.” Hundreds of volunteers worked on the recent The Gates project, which the artists first broached to the city of New York in 1979. The OK came in 2003 from Mayor Michael Bloomberg.
Expenses are more complicated, too: The second Curtain curtain cost $700,000, The Gates was $21 million. So far, the artists have spent $2 million on River, which is the only project on the drawing board at this point, and which Jeanne-Claude has indicated could be their last.
While it might have been easier to mount, the project presented headaches of a different kind.
Because of what van der Marck describes as mistakes by the New York engineering firm that worked on the 1971 project, the initial curtain succumbed to strong fall winds even before it was unfurled.
Van der Marck soon after took a job teaching at the University of Washington in Seattle, but returned to Colorado during summer 1972 for the second try on Curtain.
But it was, again, not to be long lived: A little more than a day after the fabric veil was unrolled, winds caught it and battered it against the rocks.
It wasn’t supposed to be that way; the cloth’s manufacturer, J.P. Stevens Co. of New York, had described it as being loosely woven enough to let through some air, and five times as strong as the material used to make parachutes.
Van der Marck recalls his reaction to the second try as “seeing it go up and seeing it go down almost hours after that, I had a sense of accomplishment and then a sense of failure. That failure translated into my having failed Christo. As project director, in that vital task, I failed.” There was no thought of a third attempt. “It was a little bit like how we got out of Vietnam.” But time has changed his opinion of the effort.
“The second time, it was an act of God. The first time was a failure. Everything was done to secure that the second time would be a success. We were literally crying, seeing it go up. We were so satisfied. It was a long, jubilant day. People came from Aspen and Denver, cars were filing through the gap. It was a big event.” A different engineering firm, Ken R. White Co. of Denver, had been brought in to consult. The president at the time, Art Krill, remembers the artists as “easy to work with.” They gave him a “beautiful hardback book on the project. One of the pages was a piece of the material.” “I was sorry the wind blew it down,” Krill said, “but the man who did the aeronautics was not with the firm.” Staying in touch The man who was mayor during installation of the second Curtain, John Scalzo, still sees no reason to dispute his quote about the event from years ago.
“We couldn’t afford to buy the advertising we got,” he said recently from his home in Rifle. “They went through channels and got all the permissions they needed. They laid it all out up front what they were doing.
“And they were really nice; the worst part of it was when the wind got hold of it and tore it.” (The mayor during the period in which the artists approached the town about the project, Bill Tadus, has since died.) Van der Marck has kept in touch with the artists, and worked as director of the precursor to the Miami Art Museum when “Surrounded Islands” was installed in 1983.
And he attended the 25th Curtain reunion in Rifle in 1997. Organized by the Rifle Chamber of Commerce, the event drew a couple hundred people, said Sharon Church, Chamber director at that time. All the food and drink was orange, and a commemorative stamp of the event was issued.
Of the artists, she recalls, “They autographed anything anyone brought them.” Fond memories When the second Curtain blew apart, shredded by the wind, newspaper stories made the artists sound sanguine.
“I loved it while it lasted,” Jeanne-Claude was quoted as saying. “I’m not really disappointed, although it would have been nice if the curtain hadn’t ripped.” “I promised I would get it up there,” Christo said at the time. “I didn’t promise how long it would stay.” And now? What do they think of now when they hear the words Valley Curtain?
Christo’s face lit up when asked about the old project earlier this week in Salida, though he simply said: “In 1970s, we took a trip to Colorado, and decided to do the project.” Jeanne-Claude summed up her reaction in one word: “Beauty.” INFOBOX Valley Curtain Christo’s first project in Colorado * The proposal: Christo and project director Jan van der Marck approached state officials Feb. 18, 1971 * Where: Rifle Gap, seven miles north of Rifle, over Colorado 325 * First attempt: Partially unrolled Oct. 9, 1971 (Cost, approximately $250,000) * Time in place: Minutes, then the wind tore the fabric off its bindings. site detroit institute of arts
* Second attempt: Unfurled Aug. 10, 1972 (Cost, approximately $700,000).
* Time in place: About 28 hours.
* Taken down: Aug. 22, 1972.
* Width: Stretching 1,250 feet in the Gap.
* Surface: 160,000 square feet of fabric.
* Height: 180 feet.
* Weight: Six tons (five of it fabric).
Over the River Christo’s proposed project in Colorado * What: Seven suspended sections of aluminum-coated fabric, in 75 segments of 962 panels. In all, 1 million square feet of fabric.
* Where: Intermittently across 40 miles of the Arkansas River, from the Chaffee County line to Parkdale. (Artists Christo and Jeanne-Claude traveled 15,000 miles in 1992 to look at 89 rivers before choosing the Arkansas.) * The effect: From above, designed to look silvery; from below, a translucent quality will allow viewers to see sky and clouds.
* Inspiration: When lifting fabric off a barge, while wrapping the Pont Neuf in Paris, the artists looked up, and saw the light.
* When: The artists hope for a two-week period between July 15 and Aug. 15, 2008, “at the earliest.” * Financing: No grants or sponsorships, just income from the sale of work Christo makes as “preparatory studies” for this particular piece. So far, $2 million has been spent.
CAPTION(S):
Photo (5) Less than a third of artist Christo Javacheff’s quarter-mile-long Valley Curtain remained intact in Rifle Gap after sudden stormy winds devastated the project only a few hours after it was installed in 1971. Project leader Jan van der Marck blamed a New York engineering firm for not properly accounting for the autumn winds that tore the curtain apart before it was fully unfurled. PHOTO ILLUSTRATION / ROCKY MOUNTAIN NEWS / 1971 CAPTION: Jeanne-Claude Javacheff, wife of artist Christo Javacheff, sews a rip that developed in the Valley Curtain project near Rifle. Bracing her against the wind is Germano CeLant, the project historian. Engineering problems thwarted the first Valley Curtain attempt after a few hours. The second try, in 1972, stayed up for 28 hours before wind blew it down. PHOTO ILLUSTRATION / ROCKY MOUNTAIN NEWS / 1971 CAPTION: Christo: Raises the curtain on another fantasy CAPTION: Riders pass under the arched portion of Christo’s Valley Curtain, running over Colorado 325 in Rifle Gap in 1972. Wind blew the Curtain against rock walls the next day. The Curtain has been colorized. PHOTO ILLUSTRATION BY BRIAN CLARK / ROCKY MOUNTAIN NEWS FILE PHOTO/1972 CAPTION: Christo’s 1992 rendering of his proposed Over the River project on the Arkansas River.
Chandler, Mary Voelz
The Government does not hate you. The Government does not like you. It is indifferent. The Government is not an entity with feelings, remorse, ethics or conscious. It is a collective of individuals working according to rigid flawed guidelines. The government is not an individual therefore the government as a whole has no rights whatsoever. People can have rights, this corporate entity called the United States has no rights. It functions to take rights and to oppress. There are often individuals within the government who wish to ‘do good’ but overall that is impossible. The nature of government prohibits any good for the very means of which the state reaches its ends is immoral.
Comments
Powered by Facebook Comments