("Ruth Kettle wrote Guerrilla Warfare as a Last Resort" B.B.C. 21/8/99).

Advocist Discussion Forum. First International Declaration of Peace.

New Years Day will be a turning point for modern day society. In the current age of technological autocracy, computers are an integral part of the make up of the integral structure of the system we live in. Regardless to what political perspective you ascribe to, and regardless to status in society, whether we like it or not, our lives are controlled by computers. This is integral. And this is as much a reality when it comes to our growing dependence on the Internet.

New Years Day, whatever the consequence of our reliance on technology slipping away, to whatever extent, will be a turning point for the Internet. It will dictate, one way or the other, whether the Internet will fall, or whether it will be the forum of the coming age. If the Internet will fall, it will certainly be as a part of the infrastructure of capitalism and its dependence on the Big Brother implications that came with the silicone age. Far more likely, it will hiccup; but the Internet will survive, becoming a new forum to take Western society into its next era. This is not to discuss the likelihood of the Internet falling, although we feel the debate has been stifled, but the possibilities of the Internet becoming a future form of control.

Commerce on the Internet is developed to such an extent now, that the wheels of State across the globe, will never accept the defeat that the Millennium Bug will impend. But the Internet itself is not the henchman of capitalism that all new designs of society have become. Okay, so there are connection charges; phone bills; the cost of computers. But things are changing. The Internet brings about a new phase in democracy. Instead of the chance of a brand new car on a game show, capitalism now offers the working class woman or man in the Supermarket, "free access to the Internet". Computers are becoming easier to use and more accessible. The freedom of the communications system impends. Cybercafes have offered everyone with a fundamental knowledge of cyberspace immediate enlightenment. Despite the inevitable authority that will always result from capitalism offering anything at all, Cyberspace has become a virtual society for the expression, discussion and escalation of every view open in society today. In this, I ask myself, how does this benefit the people if democracy can only ever benefit a minority?

Certain issues dog 20th Century Internet. Rip offs, cults, pornography. But it has to be taken in context. This is only inevitable. The issue is that every view in society is equal in cyberspace. If the Internet is to become the next major form of interaction, that it looks set to be, then these problems will sort themselves out. The question of this discussion, is to discuss the idea of the Internet as a possible new power in democracy. Power to the People.

As a part of the philosophy of the Advocation, we believe that pornography should be abolished. This would be the act of a State, although it would be beneficial to society as a whole, and is our demand (issued through non violence), to create the democratic society that we support. Even so, in a truly libertarian society, pornography would exist and there would be freedom of communities, but we believe that the State abolition of pornography, is the only was to create an Advocist republic without State. And it is this society that this discussion sets out to debate.

Why do we need revolution? Surely revolutions are futile acts of aggression against democracy? Whilst the Advocation have always advocated that they are not, the discussion of Internet Communism, as discussed here, had changed our entire perspective on revolutionary violence. We hope it will influence others. The past of the C.C.A. has led up to this, and is the issue that we must here set out to discuss.

The politics of the Advocation previously, have already been acknowledged as a strategy only of violence. Our politics were the politics of 'From Here to There'; the only thought out strategy of 'From Here to There'. The politics of the Cestre Cantre Advocation were the philosophy of the take over of the State through the actions of the prostitutes taking up arms. Although the C.C.A. in reality did little to achieve this, despite a lot of hard work, if we had been aware of our goal at the end of the revolutionary war, then things would have been different. We set up to bring about revolution for those who preached the philosophy of violent revolution. In the long run they weren't interested, and the realisation of the society we wish to achieve has now changed the philosophy of the C.C.A. as revolutionaries, in a very big way.

What has changed is not our philosophy of revolution from below. We still wish to see the autonomy of the downtrodden. What has changed, is what we see as being the outcome of the revolution we advocate. We wish to see a non violent society post revolution. We now realise that this can only be realistically be achieved through methods of non violent resistance.

What the year 2000 means for revolutionaries, is the inevitable breakdown of society that will come about, albeit temporarily, through the collapse impended by capitalist reliance on computers. For the C.C.A., it means something different.

To get to the point, 2000 is a turning point for the Internet. The next century will decide positively whether we must rely on capitalism to provide for us, if violence is not to be an inevitable consequence of the Millennium Bug. But more importantly for revolutionaries who stand against all forms of violence, as the C.C.A. now do, it will decide upon the future of established technological society as it exists today. Passive revolutionaries must now acknowledge technology: and it may come as a big surprise, that technology could be the turning point for a non violent revolution. The C.C.A. have renounced violence; as we believe this is important, in a current day context, if our politics of equality and emancipation are to be achieved.

More specifically, we see it that the Internet offers the next democratic step in a revolution that so many people have dedicated their lives to for so long. Here we propose that the Internet poses a possibility for a post revolutionary society, built democratically, that truly offers peace and equality for the entire human race.

The Internet has to be the ultimate example of democracy in action. What isn't there, will be there, and what we advocate is a society built on the liberty of freedom of expression, as it is now offered. All views are represented by the Internet; and all have an equal say. All views that are not now represented somewhere on the Internet, soon will be, and does any one view in Cyberspace hold any precedent over any other? As revolutionaries we would say that it doesn't; and it is a society based on this freedom, that we would like to see paramount in new revolutionary philosophy. We propose one libertarian society based on this freedom; and we propose that this could be set up, without any use of violence whatsoever.

Of course, revolutionaries have always advocated violence, and we believe that this will always be an inevitable occurrence. But the arguments for pacifism will always hold strong; and the realisation of what a revolutionary society, based on peace and democracy could be like, without being built from the violence of mob destruction, have converted the Advocation to the advocation of peace. Can the Internet really do that? We say yes.

What we want from a peoples uprising is autonomy. No matter what revolutionary stance you take, you are supporting the autonomous uprising of the workers. The C.C.A. have supported this towards the ends of councils founded through the armament of the prostitutes. Our lack of support for this was, in part, the reason for this renunciation of violence. We now re-examine our philosophy of post revolutionary society. As we have said; this has fundamentally changed our philosophy. We still advocate independent and communistic councils. What is different is that we now advocate this as a consequence of revolution; through non violent means, now councils operating independently, trading and operating as separate council democracies, through the Internet. And if a breakdown of society is an inevitable occurrence, why shouldn't this revolutionary society be set up, through the Internet?

The Advocation do accept that violence is an inevitable consequence of revolution; and in the past we have supported it as integral in our philosophy. But the Guerilla Press have proven that the pen is more powerful than the sword; the scale of resistance instated through the dissemination of our own literature has caused rebellion on a scale larger than any violence that we may have caused in the past. We take it to the Internet here. Is this the possibly the start of a movement of the left who are going to organise for revolutionary, decentralised communities, upholding their own post revolutionary views; from Syndicalism to Cultism, trading and communicating independently from Internet terminals centralised at the heart of post revolutionary communities? Marxism advocates this, in all of its previous guises; and even if the coming revolution is to be violent, pacifists could set up on this. We could be the builders of a society that is peaceful, that is truly democratic, and equalitarian.

This is a theory that goes beyond anarchism or other forms of communism. This is Advocism, and it is a philosophy that dictates that all political perspectives could operate their own communities according to what they believe is right. On the Internet, all perspectives are equal. A society of many small scale autonomous communities bartering and communicating through Internet terminals is a libertarian society; and if set up by revolutionary pacifists, would be one without war.

So we should set up now. We should start by setting an example of people without authority, setting up independent Advocist communes, bartering production for transport; book sales for distribution; to set up a worthy example of Advocist society. A society that is peaceful and truly democratic. We do not set up to offer any utopia, only a practical way of running society in a current day setting, where all will have an equal say, regardless to whether or not the State be overthrown. And regardless to whether or not its overthrow be violent, or the work of Advocist co-operation.

R.P.R.With that, the gueRilla PRess have already embarked on our project to employ the Internet as the most central part of our revolutionary diresque (or autonomous revolutionary community in Royston). This 'central part', that we intend to grow into a 'revolutionary diresque', is a militant catalyst front, set up through the non violent intentions stated here, as a radical registration scheme for books. As Advocists have always spoken of creating a revolutionary catalyst, we intend to do so here; but now within the law as a strategy of non violent autonomy. The Radical Presses Register are the first example of our 'Campaign for Council Anarchism' (the Cestre Cantre Advocation), and aim to operate within the framework of the philosophy implied within this statement. An individual can set up as a Council of Advocism. The Radical Presses Register are my own.

The R.P.R. are not a paramilitary group. However, our past dictates that we support all factions of the left. The Radical Presses Register are a part of the gueRilla PRess, and in that go out to protest that the pen is mightier than the sword. In this, our literature is available to the left for free, but here we hypothesise that the Internet may be the new strategy for the pen. Our ultimate plan is, through setting up in publishing from the point of view of an actual Advocist diresque, we can set up the politics stated here, call it Advocism or anything you will, in a current day situation, to prove that this is possible in todays society: as is the non violent overthrow of the State.

So, in that, the Radical Presses Register see ourselves as the inventors of a system of revolutionary autonomy, that can be set up now, in anticipation of a coming revolution, that will propose a peaceful society once this revolution has ultimately taken place. In that, we must fight for this system to be set up, against corruption, and by fighting the counter revolutionary politics of the far right (as they exist to destroy peoples autonomy; they will themselves have an equal say in the Advocist revolutionary democracy). The primary example of this corruption we fight, being the slander of the Satanist Ruth Kettle. As this essay is being written, under my own copyright, the Satanist has publicly accused me, through extremely biased media Thought Police tactics, to be plagiarising this work as her own; using every trick available to condemn the author as "stupid torture", as well as many other right wing slanders. As this leaflet draws to a close, I must point out that this philosophy stands as my own, as a revolutionary who has seen the reason in pacifism and an equal say for all. Maybe one day she will find her own community, and they will make her better. But for the time being, if we are to propose Advocism as a revolutionary view, we must be aware that the Satanic Church are against us, and use our wits to welcome a revolutionary new diresque. Our demands still stand; now more so as we have found our unique point of view. But we have renounced violence, now supporting the prostitutes to be with us, to find a better existence, and to join us as we now take our views to the world.Tim Telsa 1999.

The C.C.A. do not propose to send out unsolicited material. If anyone would like to be taken off our contacts list, or included for that matter, then please drop us a line. We hold regular meetings, and details are available c/o myself.


Details of gueRilla PRess titles and membership also available from c/o myself......