Some of the feedback I have received about Antibodies has revolved around the idea of resistance. What exactly am I suggesting here? I’ve just come across this definition of ‘fighting back’ from What We Leave Behind by Derrick Jensen (pictured) and Aric McBay which explains very nicely what I mean.
“Fighting back, in the broadest sense, means a great deal. It means giving up on the fairy tale that those in power act in the best interest of us or the planet, or that they are systematically capable of thinking in the long term. It means no longer pretending that industrial progress will bring us to some bright new beautiful tomorrow. It means stepping outside of the carefully circumscribed limits that keep us ineffective. It means deliberate and strategic opposition to those in power, instead of attempts to lobby or convince them to please stop exploiting people and destroying the world.
“Fighting back means doing what is appropriate. It means seeking solutions appropriate to the scale of a problem. It means not ruling out actions just because those in power (or Gandhian activists, or the Bible, or those who think buying recycled toilet paper is sufficient, or liberal members of the ‘loyal opposition’) say they shouldn’t be used. And fighting back may or may not look like fighting: it doesn’t have to look like violence (although it may). It means not using violence when it’s appropriate to not use violence. It means using violence when it is appropriate to use violence. It means using industrial technology when it’s appropriate, and not using it when it’s not appropriate. It means being strategic, and being smart, and remembering our allegiances and our end goals.”
Leave a Reply