Punishment follows crime. If crime falls because the sacred disap­pears, punishment must no less be dragged into its fall; because it too only has meaning in relation to something sacred. They have abolished ecclesiastical punishments. Why? Because how someone behaves toward the “holy God” is his own affair. But as this one punishment, ecclesiastical punishment, has fallen, so all punishments must fall. As sin against the so-called God is a person's own affair, so is that against every sort of so-called sacred thing. According to our theories of penal law, with whose “timely improvement” people are struggling in vain, they want to punish people for this or that “inhumanity” and make the foolishness of these theories especially clear by their consequences, in that they hang the little thieves and let the big ones go. For violation of property, you have the penitentiary, while for “forced thought,” sup­pression of “natural human rights,” only—presentations and petitions.

The criminal code has continued existence only through the sacred, and falls to pieces by itself if they give up punishment. Now every­where they want to create a new penal law without having reserva­tions about punishment. But it is precisely punishment that must give way to satisfaction, which again cannot aim at satisfying right or justice, but at procuring a satisfactory outcome for us. If one does to us something we won't put up with, we break his power and bring our own to bear; we satisfy ourselves on him and don't fall into the folly of trying to satisfy right (the phantasm). The sacred isn't to defend itself against human beings, but rather the human being is to defend himself against human beings; as, of course, God too no longer de­fends himself against human beings, that God to whom once and in part, indeed, even now, all “God's servants” offered their hands to punish the blasphemer, as still to this very day, they offer their hands to the sacred. That devotion to the sacred also brings it about that without any lively interest of one's own, one only delivers malefactors into the hands of the police and the courts: an apathetic giving over to the authorities, “who will, of course, best administer sacred things.” The people goes utterly nuts, sending the police against everything that seems immoral, or even only unseemly, to it; and this popular rage for the moral protects the police institution more than the mere government could possibly protect it.

In crime the egoist has up to now asserted himself and mocked the sacred; the breaking with the sacred, or rather of the sacred, can be­come general. A revolution never returns, but an immense, reckless, shameless, conscienceless, proud—crime, doesn't it rumble in the dis­tant thunder, and don't you see how the sky grows ominously silent and gloomy?

— Max Stirner, The Unique and Its Property

I became alive once more. At the dances I was one of the most untiring and gayest. One evening a cousin of Sasha, a young boy, took me aside. With a grave face, as if he were about to announce the death of a dear comrade, he whispered to me that it did not behoove an agitator to dance. Certainly not with such reckless abandon, anyway. It was undignified for one who was on the way to become a force in the anarchist movement. My frivolity would only hurt the Cause.

I grew furious at the impudent interference of the boy. I told him to mind his own business, I was tired of having the Cause constantly thrown into my face. I did not believe that a Cause which stood for a beautiful ideal, for anarchism, for release and freedom from conventions and prejudice, should demand the denial of life and joy. I insisted that our Cause could not expect me to become a nun and that the movement should not be turned into a cloister. If it meant that, I did not want it. ‘I want freedom, the right to self-expression, everybody’s right to beautiful, radiant things.’ Anarchism meant that to me, and I would live it in spite of the whole world – prisons, persecution, everything. Yes, even in spite of the condemnation of my own closest comrades I would live my beautiful ideal.

— Emma Goldman, Living My Life

What is this life if, full of care,
We have no time to stand and stare?—

No time to stand beneath the boughs,
And stare as long as sheep and cows:

No time to see, when woods we pass,
Where squirrels hide their nuts in grass:

No time to see, in broad daylight,
Streams full of stars, like skies at night:

No time to turn at Beauty's glance,
And watch her feet, how they can dance:

No time to wait till her mouth can
Enrich that smile her eyes began?

A poor life this if, full of care,
We have no time to stand and stare.

— William H. Davies, Leisure

Follow Begumpura on Instagram:
https://www.instagram.com/begumpura.antifa

Facebook page:
https://www.facebook.com/begumpura.antifa

WhatsApp channel link: https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029VaUYZFyL7UVZcYbBWI1n

Paul's no-work-no-eat doctrine was directed by him only against the poor. All around him were the rich, virginally innocent of toil, and yet who were gorged to the gullet. Paul sharpens no dagger of invective for these.

— Bouck White,
The Call of the Carpenter (chapter XIV)

According to certain interpretations of Jesus (and his life and his teachings), he was some kind of anarchist insurrectionary – and it was Paul who turned the teachings of Jesus into an organized religion, which then became the opposite of what Jesus taught.

For example, Nietzsche:

In Paul is incarnated the very opposite of the “bearer of glad tidings” [Jesus]; he represents the genius for hatred, the vision of hatred, the relentless logic of hatred.

—The church is precisely that against which Jesus preached—and against which he taught his disciples to fight—

Some radical (and unconventional) interpretations of Jesus Christ:

Max Stirner

from https://news.1rj.ru/str/postLeftPosting/811
to https://news.1rj.ru/str/postLeftPosting/815


Friedrich Nietzsche

from https://news.1rj.ru/str/postLeftPosting/820
to https://news.1rj.ru/str/postLeftPosting/850

(these are only some of Nietzsche's quotes on this theme)


Oscar Wilde

from https://news.1rj.ru/str/postLeftPosting/842
to https://news.1rj.ru/str/postLeftPosting/845

I love the forest. It is bad to live in cities.

Ich liebe den Wald. In den Städten ist schlecht zu leben.

— Friedrich Nietzsche, TSZ

Bitterness and pain,
I could take them fain,
if with me you remain,
we could both be insane

👉🏼👈🏼

„man muss noch Chaos in sich haben, um einen tanzenden Stern gebären zu können.“

Ich bin das Chaos,
ich bin der tanzende Stern.
Ich bin Dionysos,
der Gott, der Chaos gern
stiftet; der Gott der Liebe,
und der Gott des Wein… –

Du bist die Göttin der Schönheit;
dich anzubeten – das ist meine
einzige Pflicht und Schuldigkeit.
Du bist auch die Göttin der Liebe,
voller göttlicher Vollkommenheit,
in die ich mich zutiefst verliebe…

– Ich bin in dich verliebt,
und mache dich zu mein'!

I am the chaos,
I am the dancing star.
I am Dionysos,
the chaos-creator;
I am the god of eros,
and the god of wine –

You are the goddess of beauty;
to worship you – that is now
mine dearest and only duty.
You are the goddess of love,
full of perfection and divinity,
with whom I'm falling in love

– of you am I amorous,
and I'll make you mine!

You are my intoxicant,
the only poison
that I do want
and can get high on...

« (der) Rausch = intoxication; (das) Gift = poison; (das) Rauschgift = intoxicant/drug; berauschen = (to) intoxicate »
(the last line would more accurately be rendered as "and that intoxicates me")

The individual cannot bargain with the State. The State recognizes no coinage but power: and it issues the coins itself.

— Ursula K. Le Guin,
The Dispossessed