#disclaimer i am not a punk i just appreciate the culture :)

[one-additional-time]

Daft Punk in Chronic'art 2007/2008 - scans & translated interview

Here it is, the long-awaited monster interview that sat untouched on my bookshelf for 6 years. I bought this magazine on eBay in 2017, fresh off the Grammys performance with The Weeknd, and I was really excited when I realized it was a huge 10 page spread... Until I started translating and realized the content was extremely in-depth and complicated. So, it got put to the side and accidentally left there for many years.

Anyway, here we go. Buckle in for a long read! Please note that I did not translate the extra sections of the article titled "Discovered" and "Very Disco" as these are just basic information about DP's discography and samples they've used- they are not part of the interview.

My usual disclaimer- I am not French, nor am I fluent in French, so some of this may be incorrect or interpreted differently than the author intended. If you find any glaring errors, my ask box is open for feedback and I can update the post/files as needed. (Post updated May 2023 with corrections)

Feel free to repost to other platforms/social media sites, but I humbly beg that you link back here or give me credit because I really spent a lot of time slaving over this (like 50+ hours).

Thank you so much for sticking around my blog after so many years. I really appreciate this fandom and community and I'm excited to experience new music with you all soon!

(Trigger warning for discussion of suicide [Electroma] in the interview!)

Download full scans and translation at my Dropbox.

Full translation below the cut.

In ten years, from Homework in 1997 to Alive 2007 and Electroma, the electro duo Daft Punk have popularized electronic music, launched fads (the French Touch, filtered house, monumental live shows), and transformed a simple music project into a verifiable universal, even metaphysical, concept. Are Daft Punk dropping the helmets?

BY: WILFRIED PARIS & OLIVIER LAMM | PHOTOS: © MAUD BERNOS

SCANS AND TRANSLATION BY STEPH @ ONE-ADDITIONAL-TIME.TUMBLR.COM

(Please see the downloadable PDF file for translation notes/comments)

Everyone has been hearing about Daft Punk for the last two months, because their live CD (Alive 2007, from EMI) and the DVD of their robotic road-movie Electroma are being released for the holidays. We wanted to go a little bit beyond the obligated promo, and the repeated wooden language found in all the media, by trapping Thomas Bangalter and Guy-Manuel de Homem-Christo for an hour and a half in a restaurant in the Latin Quarter, subjecting them to questioning, and if possible, making them drop the helmets a little bit, over ten pages and many questions.

We’re not going to harp on what you already know (the French touch, the robot helmets, the live pyrotechnics), we’ll just say that we wanted to do this thorough interview with Daft Punk because they’re more than a CD or a DVD, more than music, more than any current pop group. They are an essential symbol of our post-post-modern times, speaking in a very clear yet always paradoxical voice (between hedonistic joy and profound existential sadness) on the human condition, no less. Over the ten years of their career (Homework, like Chronic’art, again, decidedly, appeared in 1997), Daft Punk have invented a new way of presenting music to the world. The robot helmets reveal (social uniformity) more than they cover (buried humanity) and have given them perfect anonymity, which seems like the anonymity of those who succeeded, not in annihilating the self, but becoming self-less. This anonymity accentuates the dominance of the art over the artist, and it has made Daft Punk a universally well-liked and famous group.

A conceptual, pop, philosophical, even metaphysical group, Daft Punk mixes Andy Warhol (seriality, pop art, emptiness) and Friedrich Nietzsche (the man who wanted to die in Electroma, the superhuman for and against technology), mass culture (disco, Albator, Star Wars) and esoteric symbols (the masonic pyramid), the dancing body and thinking brain. In that respect, they are a purely manufactured product of our culture and likely represent the completion of the pop figure began by the Beatles: fragmented culture (the sample) and repetition, theatricality and abstraction, universalism and experimentation, technological innovation and advanced marketing, refusal of the embodiment and worship of the personality…

The current tour (Alive can also mean “en vie”) also refers to an interstellar voyage, like Discovery and Interstella, which seemed to mean that humanity is, by nature, dispossessed, that humans do not belong on Earth but came from Heaven and are destined to return there, that they are “stardust.” They themselves [Daft Punk] are probably not aware of the symbolic and almost metaphysical significance of their creations, and they always prefer to talk about “emotions” rather than thoughts, the heart instead of the head, and they act as the “guinea pigs” for their own experiments. Listening to them, we realized that Thomas Bangalter and Guy-Manuel de Homem-Christo do not really theorize their work, their music, or their image, but that they react to the infinite accumulation of data from our culture of abundance, that they are indeed the guinea pigs of an experience that has outrun them, marionettes played by “high culture,” pop culture, and the entertainment industry. Maybe Daft Punk really are robots, and no one is pulling the strings, certainly not them.

Chronic’art: Between Homework, which would correspond to your schoolwork or your learning phase, Discovery, which would represent your adolescence, the discovery of the world, microscopic to macroscopic, and Human After All, a moment of reset before a new cycle, it seems to us like you have come full circle, which would be represented by the mirroring of your two live albums, in 1997 and in 2007. Could you have scripted your career?

Thomas Bangalter: It’s strange. We have never written out any part of our career, because even ten years ago we didn’t think we would do this for a long time. After the fact, without having planned it, we realize more that we had sort of reset prior to the live show from 2007. For us, these concerts, this tour, this CD, they are more of a new step than a conclusion. We had not done concerts for 10 years, and there was something very exciting about doing things that weren’t technologically possible when we started. With the last live, we wanted to produce something original, that could predict what might become the norm of tomorrow. We know that we’ve done certain things in the past that were five years ahead of their time, and we are happy to be trying something no one else has done right now. We feel like, during each album, we’ve started back at zero and have had to create a new process, even if it’s true that there is a consistency which emerges in the straight line of our career. But this consistency is not defined a priori, we just emphasize working on projects that can become sort of a realignment of everything we’ve accomplished until now. Interstella was consistent with Discovery, the live show was consistent with our third album compared to the two previous albums, but each step represents, in the moment, the desire to start a new cycle. As for Human After All and Electroma, they’re about something darker, less celebratory… Maybe the live show is a loop; our record label released a Best Of last year, but the concert itself and the way we worked on it is more a way of combining things and expressing them in a new way, rather than celebrating a sort of anniversary or something from the past. We definitely didn’t want to give people the impression that they were in 1997, in a continuation of past music: we instead wanted to give them the chance to feel like they were really in 2007.

During the live shows, you mix together your own tracks, referencing and quoting yourselves. It’s like being simultaneously and precisely between 1997 and 2007, as if the past and the present were merging. All of your songs evolving in a sort of loop…

T.B.: It’s almost the third generation of sampling: us sampling ourselves. At the same time, it’s like having created a universe and an aesthetic that is more than the music, or that the music isn’t actually a central vector. Our approach isn’t at all demonstrative, it’s entirely sensory. There isn’t another message to understand. That being said, there is a desire for cohesion, to make sure that each element added to the structure resonates with the others, with the little mythology that governs this universe. It’s a bit like in a video game, each new element opens a new level in a new environment rather than replacing an older element. We wanted, for example, to break these things with Human After All, but in the end we realized that the album was very cohesive in the continuity of our work.

There is a very strong sense of nostalgia, mixed with a strangeness, in the timeless juxtapositions listeners are subjected to in the tracks. They seem to be complementing and responding to each other, as much musically as thematically… 

Guy-Manuel de Homem-Christo: It’s especially very exciting to see that twelve or thirteen years after our first maxi, our music has not aged too much. There is a sense of nostalgia1, but it still works in the present, and it’s very strange to see that we can mix four tracks from four different eras simultaneously, and not a single one kills the mood. Right after we started making music, we were seeking timelessness. It’s the same with Electroma. At our core, we are fans of timeless things. If you listen to the Beatles, aside from their very first period which is a little bit stuck in the past, you notice that time doesn’t touch their music. We are following that: we are trying to move through time without getting stuck in it. In the same way, we are trying to make sure that our music can be listened to by a lot of different people, without having to worry about languages or genres.

The Beatles were, for that matter, the first group to reference themselves, for example in All You Need is Love, where John Lennon sings She Loves You… 

G-M.H-C.: We don’t compare ourselves to the Beatles, either… 

T.B.: The idea is constructing a cohesive universe from a series of spontaneous attempts. If you watch Star Wars, people don’t seem to come from when the film was made. It’s as if the 70s have no effect on the film’s universe. Its atmosphere is its own, even if mixes a lot of things together. For about five or six years we have tried not to let the times we live in make an impression on us.

You are very privileged to be in a time when everything moves so fast, or everything ages so fast, right in the middle of acceleration. For example, you did a massive world tour without having an album to promote… 

G-M.H-C.: The day before the first concert of the tour, at Coachella, we were terrified, we weren’t sure of anything. Every time we try something new, we start back at zero.

T.B.: It’s the live show that sparked the craze, I think, truly. The success was really unintentional. Separate from that, being immersed in a certain underground before our first album taught us a lot. We’ve seen all the trends come and go—jungle, speed garage, electroclash, new rave, French touch, revival—and we are really surprised to have slipped by all of that. We didn’t want to be specifically concentrated on music, we only released three albums in 15 years, and we had a lot of luck. The legitimacy of our music, the future of our music lives in the combination of different forms of expression, the scope of influences, the mixing of techno with funk, with metal, the intermingling of rules and cliches. A lot of important decisions have been roughly made; also by means of spending time solidifying this roughness in order to share it. In fact, electronic music, in the 90s, put you in a state of experimentation, urgency, innovation, it literally prohibited you from repeating yourself. Electronic music was still very elitist, because it was expensive—you had to go to the library to find out about these musicians, you had to go to Beaubourg to make photocopies of books on filmmakers, you had to go to small shops to buy old drum machines. We know what changed, we’re familiar with the saturation that followed. We were also lucky because actually there wasn’t much of that happening when we started out.

The permanence of Daft Punk is also really linked to your image. People don’t only dance to your music, they dance with your personas, with the robots, like you predicted the fatal characteristic of the embodiment of rock (John Lennon, Kurt Cobain). With your robot helmets, you have made the entire process of love, requisition, and the sacrificial reclaiming in your place impossible. You come across as impersonal and therefore verifiably impossible to sacrifice. Not gods, rockers, heroes, nor rulers. The helmet prohibits any kind of identification process. When put on, they show the listener-viewer their own reflection. By giving nothing, the helmet says (silently), “Know thyself.” Can your work be considered an invitation for people to know themselves?

G-M.H-C.: Yes, I agree with that interpretation. At least, that’s what happens with our concerts. Audience members, rather than being lost in the view of a far-off guy, Mick Jagger or another inaccessible idol above the audience, find themselves between us, or even with themselves. It’s kind of like a rave, without superstars, like in the era of anonymity. The robots don’t give the audience much except music. There are robots in a pyramid, but the audience enjoys it in a more selfish, more self-centered way.

T.B.: It’s a mixture—the chance to show the listener their own reflection, to respond to a question with another question, but also the opportunity to go back to a fiction, in a cult that isn’t the cult of a personality, but of an art, of an image, of an aesthetic. Without personification. Then we can let ourselves to be two robots in a pyramid of light. If our faces were uncovered, it would be the most megalomaniacal thing in the world; with the helmets, no one sees us because we stay within the fiction. And without wanting to make a joke, there is also a degree of separation, a distance. A distance from the reflection, like in Electroma, or a distance from the entertainment, softer.

All the lines from Human After All work in the same way. They recall Kraftwerk, but Kraftwerk developed a precise message about celebrating, in a way, the immediate future. Your messages are a lot more ambiguous: are they critical, ironic, devoid of meaning? Like we see so well in Electroma, your helmets are, above all else, mirrors…

T.B.: Ambiguity is good, because it allows for a certain interaction between the viewer and the artist; between what the viewer interprets and what the artist is trying to depict. It’s very participative, and that comes from a desire to go against the demonstration. We are the first consumers of our music, and we hold the view that we can’t make any judgement values by calling things into question. In speaking about technology, about consumer society, which completely inhabits our art, we don’t want to teach a lesson, or offer a point of view or a judgement, we just want to find paradoxes and point them out as is. For example, we’re dependent on consumer society and it’s so appealing, productive, optimized, and at the same time totally terrifying, horrible, and very funny.

Your work is dialectical: sometimes it seems to denounce a sort of robotic totalitarianism (like in the Technologic video which depicts propaganda of a robot on top of a pyramid) and at the same time it plays with this imagery, strikingly. The video for Around The World also shows how robots surround and surveil the population; they are in the last circle, and they are the ones who chant the phrase “Around The World.” Does the video denounce the surveillance of us by nonhumans, or does it condition us to accept it? We never know if you’re denouncing a conspiracy against humanity or if you’re participating in it. You use of language is equally dialectical. Your language is refined, born from catchphrases and words of totalitarian order (Technologic), and if taken literally, it’s this: the phrase “Television Rules The Nation” can be taken as the assertion of an established fact. It then becomes constraint, manipulation. At the same time, the distance imposed by the performance can give the words a double meaning, and adds to them a critique of this established fact, even the denunciation of a totalitarian power. This recalls the “doublethink” in Orwell’s 1984: the capacity to simultaneously accept two opposing points of view and thereby put critical thinking on the back burner. Where do you situate yourselves in this in-betweenness?

T.B.: But it’s inside this paradox where we progress. In terms of our experimentation, we are in fact the heart of the system; it would be totally obscene to lean more to one side or the other, to claim to be part of a totalitarian system, as if we were giving lectures. It’s because this is so interesting that we refused to do any promotion for Human After All, because there couldn’t be a willingness on our part to encourage people to buy the album, because of this paradox. Because it’s like an unbiased opinion on technology, on consumer society. The video for Technologic actually gives you the keys to derive an ironic and scary message from the track, but it has since been used by Apple in a commercial for the iPod, and there the lyrics turned into blind praise for technology! It’s funny seeing to what extent the double meaning has effectively functioned. That’s why we so often refer to Andy Warhol who had an experimental approach through his connection to pop culture that, depending on the project, had as much a place in very elitist and private circles as it did on supermarket shelves. Creating with perplexity, in short.

Nevertheless, you use very strongly significant symbols, like the robots or the pyramid. The pyramid that you use on stage is a Masonic symbol. It is on the dollar bill, with George Washington and the note, “New World Order.” The pyramid represents the structure of society, from the masses up to the elites and the leaders. The cornerstone with the “all-seeing eye” surely represents the summation of technology which, though it could be plainly operational, will make sure that the “New World Order” can truly start coming forward and establishing itself on Earth. Some interpret it like the construction of a new technology, a technologic eye that would see all, through a generalized surveillance. With that said, the presence of robots like operators of this pyramid makes a lot of sense. How do you fit in with regard to these symbols and this story?

T.B.: We work a lot with the senses, with the power of symbols on the subconscious, and the pyramid, in effect, is a very heavy symbol, in terms of the senses. We don’t want to discuss the details of the symbolism, but to question its power without its history. The pyramid has become a symbol because, geometrically, harmonically, it’s a magical, occult, mysterious object. There is also this mysterious and occult, on the verge of paranormal, power in music. No one can really theorize about the effects of music on the body and mind, so it’s incredible. We just try to pass on that magic in a rather empirical way. Moreover, we could carry out experiments on the way in which light or sound intensity acts on the body and on crowds, to see which types of sensations or emotions are provoked by one frequency or another. But we could never really explain the reason for these effects.

G-M.H-C.: We are the guinea pigs of our own universe. We managed to create a sort of self-sufficiency between the two of us, which lets us experiment with a consistent voice, and what works for us tends to work for the audience, it’s like a small miracle. We put a pyramid on stage because we think it’s cool, and it makes everyone trip out.

When you talk about guinea pigs, it’s as if you were manipulated from the outside, by a mysterious third-party, as if you were also puppets. There is a determinism there, but one that serves humanity. According to the Laws of Robotics by Isaac Asimov, it’s humankind who constructed the robot, and the robot is at its service…

T.B.: Above all we want to express a paradox on the discussion of human dependency on technology. We’re not virtuosos and we rely on technology like a crutch. We could never do it without technology, and at the same time, we try to value, like any artists, the human element in our work. The process we’ve used for these fifteen years has been to try merging the machines and us. We are the operators of these machines, the editors of the experiments: we select them, we choose them, and we decide to keep them or not. Daft Punk is the product of a tug of war between human and technology, always questioning the place of technology in the project.

Electroma addresses this discussion between human and machine, in a sort of grand general inversion. Electroma seems to be the account of a traumatic experience: in the world of robots, the two characters presented a human face to the others, in openness, generosity, expressiveness. The result of this demonstration of humanity leaves them ostracized, chased, and reduced to aimlessness and suicide. Do you think that showing your humanity is dangerous?

T.B.: Yes, that’s the background of the film. But speaking more broadly, formally, it’s part of the same approach as what we’ve been able to do before; to know how to create emotion while using machines, in a creative process. Without actors, without a script, without a real plotline, but with photography, color, framing, made from machines, objects, just like a still life. We began with creating an environment around the spectator, who is almost like the only actor in the film, and wondering how to make them experience these emotions, which are not the same as those on the dancefloor, but aesthetic emotions, where the spectator can project onto themselves. The film is totally open, and we thought a lot about Magritte when making the plans. What you can see in Electroma is essentially sensation, that’s a lot more at the level of the gut or the eyes than of the brain…

Robots After All by Philippe Katerine was clearly inspired by your album Human After All and touches on the idea that human society has attained such a degree of conditioning and conforming that humanity became a species of robot, a determined creature, ruled by automation, in their language as much as their everyday comportment. When we recently asked what he thought about your music, Katerine told us, “I hear nothingness in it, so I want to find a place there.” Is the universality of your music due to the fact that it’s also, in a sense, empty?

T.B.: It’s empty because it’s more sensory than significance, yes. Theoretically devoid of sense, it allows people to see something from nothing and project themselves there. We just heard Katerine’s single. Our music is open, it can be interpreted and taken in different ways.

The musical abstraction and loops that by and large make up your music allow each person to take possession of the music and go beyond it. There is a shamanic aspect in this usage of emptiness and repetition. As a matter of fact, musicians like Animal Collective, who were inspired by shamanic trances, now cite you as an influence. Also, you could interpret the end of Electroma, when the two robots die by explosion and combustion, as referring to shamanic initiation rituals, in which one goes through a symbolic death by division of the body or self-combustion. Could you say that the end of Electroma represents, in some sort, this symbolic and initiatory death? In other words, do you perceive a shamanic side to your music?

T.B.: Yes, it’s a trance: the loop, the heartbeats… We use samples to express the desire of prolonging a strong sensation that comes during one or two seconds in a track, and wanting to repeat this sensation, not only feeling it for ten minutes, but also seeing what consequences come from ten minutes of that feeling, how everything unfolds. Visually, with Electroma, our desire is the same: to create images or an assembly of images that produce a physical sensation, a feeling of hypnosis, wandering, or weariness; in any case a state of mind that you can only reach by feeling this sensation for a certain time, for quite a long time. 

Wandering, loss of identity, and expropriation are pop themes in a sense. If you think of the Beatles, the “Magical Mystery Tour,” the transformation of the Beatles into the “Lonely Hearts Club Band.” As of now, you are a group that “turns,” that travels, to those “lonely hearts.” Is there a “trip” pop?

T.B.: It’s true that during this tour, we felt a little bit of a psychedelic thing: there are people who saw and re-watched the concert multiple times, almost like a Grateful Dead concert, with this idea of there being, during the concert, something imperceptible that you can never capture on disc or on film: an experience which was unique and can only live in reality, at a time where everything is virtualized. We felt like people wanted happenings, concrete experiences, which could consequently be produced by advanced technology: we could multiply the giant screens, have a very strong sound, and combine everything into these unprecedented audiovisual processes, which had never been seen anywhere before. Even a film projected in an IMAX theater could be no more than the “ghettoblaster” from another experiment with new technologies. Our music is moving: it was within an industrial system which ended, it was dependent on the economy. And the economy was destroying itself, it influenced new formats and new ways of creation, like the tours we’re doing currently.

Today, music needs to find new ways for distribution, with the death of the record industry and the virtualization of music. The live show, as a unique experience, is a response to this situation. You were the first to start a download site on the internet, with the Daft Club in 2001, which didn’t work out. Was it five years too early?

T.B.: Being current five years too early is really better than we can hope for. It’s good to be precursory, it’s almost our principal objective. Speaking about the musical economy, I think that music has never been as important as it is now, and the concert isn’t a response to difficulty selling CDs nowadays, because live shows are also very expensive. Economic upheavals are interesting: I read a book recently by Jacques Attali, Bruits, which talks about the musical economy and its power since the Middle Ages, and if you look at the place of music in the world in the last 2 thousand or 3 thousand years, the place of the record and pop music industries will have not been an end in itself, compared to music as a whole. It’s interesting to try to find out where music will go and what it will generate, in the sense that it is often a precursor of the relationship to come between social and economic powers. But we define ourselves less as musicians than as artists and creators, in trying to combine things and experiment with new formats and new technologies. We aren’t uniquely musicians.

Homework represents a sort of pinnacle of the age where a certain technologic novelty was expressed directly through music. You could literally hear knobs being turned. Does Daft Punk necessarily have to excel technologically in an age where all these methods have become normalized? Were the concerts from your new tour sort of like an advantage?

T.B.: It’s not an advantage, it’s a set of challenges that could be technological, actually. You wind up with a concert that looks sort of futuristic, like a remake of Close Encounters of the Third Kind or a mix of a Grateful Dead and a Kraftwerk concert. Making something that we couldn’t make before. We pick up the tools, we manipulate them, we try to progress. Electronic music in itself, in 2007, doesn’t seem to me to be very conducive to experimentation from a strictly musical point of view. I’m waiting for the new generations to prove to me otherwise… We pay attention to technological developments because we’re interested in them, and because they are at the heart of our art. Musical instruments are advanced technologies which have continuously reinvented music.

Since Human After All was released online, there were a lot of rumors about the album, which was an indication that people were waiting for you. In that context, are you able to feel free as musicians? Have you produced things in reaction to the public’s expectations?

T.B.: Actually, we aren’t free relative to our own expectations. We can’t totally set the public aside, but we have our own demands and we respond to our own vision of what we make, while taking into account paradoxes, contradictions, restarts, new beginnings. But we don’t think about the public: it’s both selfish and more respectful for people because we don’t have the pretentiousness of putting ourselves in their shoes.

G-M.H-C.: We are our own fans. We work until we find moments of pleasure in our work, and when we save those moments and explore them on an album or in a film which we release, that resonates for people. But within those moments, which are like lightning, we are like spectators—we feel like we’re revealing something, and discovering something we created at the same time. In this way we are ourselves in the position of spectators and fans. I imagine that this process is even more evident in painting: you have a piece of canvas in front of you, and there is a tangible process of creation. Creation is a mystery and you can really speak about magic when it comes to music or art.

Could the image of the pyramid that you use be a graphic representation of your music? With its foundations, progressions, ascents, and its climax? Bercy, it so happens, also has a pyramid shape…

G-M.H-C.: Not all of our songs follow a progression. We have flat songs, square songs, round songs… And in the live show, there are a few final moments where the tension comes back down. Bercy really does have a pyramid shape, but the top is missing. And it’s true that we would have really liked to play on top of it (laughs)…

[tabooiart]

beetlejuice au where everything’s the same except lydia is a punk instead of a goth

[jungstruly]

ship your moots with nct ot21?

[Langga anon and 💛anonie, you're here too!!]

Oh dear anon, prepare for a long ass post! It took me almost a day to match my moots with NCT and I'm rambling most of the time. Forgive me :<

Also, forgive me if I forget you! That doesn't mean I love you less, I promise. I may or may not do a part two so that I can fit every people who are dear to me.

[Disclaimer: This is only just for fun and is purely based on my feeling and what I perceive that member would be. All of my ramblings are hypothetical uWu.]

Taeil - @moondustaeil The talent these two people have istg, making them a power couple oh my. Ambs, the sweetest human being who just rolled with my crazy ass. Idk but I can't imagine any mutual who would be great with this man other than you. He respects and adores you like a captain respects the sea (it's a quote i found online, i forgot where but yus, credits to that quote)

Johnny - @espresseo-cafe Warm, these two people are just so warm and I feel like Jai and Johnny have a mature relationship. I can totally see both of you just talking about life in general  at like 2 in the morning over a cup of coffee just because. I can totally see you catching up with Johnny’s playful banter. Ahhhhh, you both feel like home in general <3

Taeyong - @badwithten uwu my precious bean! I ship you with Yongie. The both of you are great with reaching out to people. With that being said, it's nice for him to have someone who can read his emotions without saying it out loud. He may get too busy thinking for the greater good of other people that sometimes make him neglect himself.

Yuta - @lucas-wongs and @lattaeswirl The very talented dancers NSKSKS. I may or may not stalked you both hihi. A couple who dances uGH! I love the fact that you embrace your individuality and you're your own person. You're also independent, making me ship Yuta with you. 

Kun - @mooneylooney1 My lovely Sarah who radiates great mom energy. I mean, you’re caring and responsible and just full of love. I ship you with Kun! I do believe that he’s going to take very good care of you. It’s high time that you would be taken care of. You basically bring the best of each other, having room for self-improvement as you grow together. The both of you would make a great pair! As for @sunshine-jaehyun , I can imagine the both of you adopting some cats ùwú The both of you would be the perfect person to look out for each other. You wouldn't baby tf out of each other that much. I def think that Kun wants the both of you to grow together. He's someone dedicated and consistent all throughout and he expects you to be too (I'm sure you are you soft bby! I love your eyes!!) 

Doyoung - @emvrd and @cupofjae two lovely ate’s, hello! I could talk to the both of you all day tbh. You’ve always looked out for me ever since. Thank you for that :< Okay, enough with the kadramahan ehehe, I ship the both of you with our little bunny prince. Doei has a different way of showing people his love and affection and I feel like the both of you will be very mature and chill when it comes to it. Sure he may tease and play around but he’s def a sensible and a reliable person all in all. Taeyong once said to Doei, “Doyoung-ah, control your face. It’s just a game.” and I feel like you guys will also remind him of that from time to time lmao KSKSK.

Ten - @scissorhands1617 Both of you had a bad bitch with a dash of punk energy HAHAAH but in reality, is the biggest simp out there. You're def someone who can keep up with Ten who's a bit hard to read. You're also open minded and easy to talk to. It's Ten for you and will always be Ten! Sometimes I see him in you nsksks.

Jaehyun - @jae-canikeepyou Ahhh, I can imagine you spending the whole day together, the both of you doing your own thing with some faint old love song playing in the background. No talking, just comfortable silence. I mean, it’ll be nice to have someone who totally understands you and connects with you on a deeper level. Jaehyun’s def the shy type to the point that he’ll come off as awkward. But because of your patient nature, he’ll be much at ease, knowing that there’s no pressure. He loves handwritten letters and I know that you’re the type of person to give him love letters uwu.

Winwin - @jinxouls Ngoc I ship you with Winwin! You can be goofy with each other as well as be serious and be on their A-game when there's a need for it. I feel like the both of you will hit off right away. I only trust winwin when it comes to you nDGSHSH. 

Jungwoo - @eyypeach Actual sweethearts, what a good combo! It's nice for Jungwoo to have someone as sentimental as him and would need . I immediately think of you right away! The fact that you can empathize well with people makes the both of you a great pair. He'll make you happy and you'll make him too as well uwu

Lucas - @neowrld Let's be real here, your whole family will love this big fella! I feel like he'll be interested to know your culture just because he wants to know you better. Istg, he'll be extra af, even learning your mother tongue just because. Xuxi may come of as goofy and funny but I can feel like he needs someone to hold him close as he becomes vulnerable at the end of the day. I can see you being that person. @neocitybynight hey sunny, i think you and xuxi will look cute together uwu you love checking up on people and you just have too much love to give the world uwu uwu and I think Xuxi would love that. That big baby needs the love and care there is in this world :">

Mark - @suhpressed and @celestialchans I would never not stop saying this but the both of you never fail to amaze me. I do believe that both of you are doing your best to become better at your craft. You're hardworking and talented, just like Mark which makes you a good couple since the both of you are passionate with each of your own craft. You push and inspire each other and I think that's beautiful.

Xiaojun - @legendnct Hannah, why do I feel like you’re a very busy person? Like you have a lot of things on your plate and stressed because of college/burnt out from time to time. Xiaojun’s the type of guy who massages your shoulder or temples whenever he senses that you need a break. He’ll give you the space that you want whenever you’re doing uni stuff, probably in the same room as you just letting you study and placing your fave snacks and drinks beside you to remind you to take a break sometimes. He’s clingy when he wants to but respecting you is his number 1 priority.

Hendery - @smolchenle The vibes man ndksjdks (Sabog and sabay, kaloka lmAO) Wouldn’t mind doing the stupidest thing with you . There would be no dull moments together, istg. You’re basically each other’s happy pill aweeee. Oooh hahaha, I can totally imagine you having a disgusted “wtf, dude,” on your face whenever he does something funny only to follow his lead a couple of seconds later. Aside from that, he’s very touchy and affectionate (I mean, have you seen him with his cats? Sana all cat NDKKSKSK Oh wait, sana all Camille yieee!)

Renjun - @jae-ffrey Zen, you’re a year older than me but wow, you are wise and sensible. You’re a great listener as well and I feel like Renjun would enjoy your company. He’s very open minded and isn’t afraid to have fun from time to time, making you complement each other.

Jeno - @nzeeten My cute babies! I want to keep you both in my pocket ugh. Tbh, I get a strong independent woman vibe from you but at the same time, a very huge softie inside. I feel like Jeno’s the type of boyfriend who’s low maintenance in a sense that he won’t be that much needy for attention. It’s like you do you, I do me but it’s nice to know that at the end of the day, you have each other’s arms to come home to. I can imagine how smol you look wearing Jeno’s jacket ahhhh domestic!Jeno + sweet baby Allie is just to pure and soft for this world

Haechan - @bumblebeenct Mimi! My sweet sweet Mimi who always checks up on me and is a literal walking ball of sunshine. Wait, two suns together? Wouldn’t that be a disaster? I like to believe that your patient and motherly side can keep up with that little rascal. You’re also someone he can have fun with, I am sure of that.

Jaemin - @4-sun Jaemin better take good care of you or else! You’re laidback and composed (like Jeno nHSSK) and I can definitely see him taking you out on a photowalk, just walking in your city without any plans and taking photos of different views (expect him to snap a photo of you from time to time uwu) and going to a café after. Also, you’re very generous when it comes to compliments. I can see Jaemin as someone who absolutely loves those things.

Yangyang - @lovelyvitamin The amount of crackhead energy that you two have sends nKSKSKSK. I want you to have someone who understands your amazing humor and listens to your weird and out of the blue stories. Yangyang’s there to top your crazy stories with his and would do everything in his power to make you feel loved, appreciated and happy-- even going an extra mile. You make each other happy and I live for that thought itself!

Chenle - @imaginedreamies I feel like Chenle is going to baby tf out of you plus treats you like a queen, don’t @ me. You push each other to be better versions of yourselves. Like Chenle, I feel like you’re much more of a giver than a taker. It’ll be nice for Chenle to feel the love he gives to other people. 

Jisung - Langga anon! (I lost ur acc huhuhu) Ahhhhh, my two kiddos. I ship you with him bc I highkey imagine the both of you having a cute puppy love romance. Ya know, just being subtle with each other when it comes to expressing your love and affection. Missed u baby! 

[rosesmith18]

(PnF) Headcanon #11 Thomarie Nitpicks #2 Pt.1 Clothing

This is sort of a sister post to post #6 & #7, it mentions characters from post #6, and is connected to my current series of post about the problems I have with the MnT(Marie and Thomas) Universe. I want to make it clear that I like these characters...to an extent, but to another extent I don't. I want the best for them as they were a big part of my childhood, and so in this post I want to make some tweaks to their clothing and personalities, as I find them currently sporadic and dated.

*Disclaimer: The MnT Universe is centered around (OC)Maria Flynn & (OC)Thomas Fletcher. Marie belongs to angelus19 & sam-ely-ember deviantart. Thomas Belongs to Melty64.

Maria's Child Clothing: Okay, so a lot of people have made the claim that Maria's design is generic which I will not deny. It's a blatant ripe off of her mothers clothes with a change of color palette, and while I enjoy the idea of Phineas designing her clothes to be that way, it's a waste of potential(as are most things I will mention in this post). Maria canonically adores France, and in my headcanon was born there, so I think some Parisian style could be added to this design. I'd draw instead of writing about this, but I have no artistic talent. For starters, based on my research(as I myself am not French)puffed sleeves are a common occurrence in French clothing culture, so giving Marie puffed sleeves in place of her mothers regular ones would be nice. Instead of basic shoes, ankle boots are also a common item in French clothing followed by white and/or black tights. Now, ironically enough the style of belt Isabella has on her clothes is similar to a French Skinny belt called a Maison Boinet, so just change it from being one color to a light brown with a metal clip, and it can stay-as can the main outfit. Lastly, to quote https://leoncechenal.com/french-girl-style-guide/ 'And I think the ultimate goal of all French girls is to find their own style (what they like and what they don’t) and to stick to it.', so in summary this doesn't need to look perfect or fancy it just needs to look natural.

Maria's Teen Clothing: Okay, this one is even worse in my opinion, but the whole one color thing is killing me! So, for this I did a COMPLETE recall and came up with this; A purple beret, orange bow wrapped around her neck mimicking a Parisian scarf, dressed in an orange & purple horizontal striped sweater dress that hangs off her shoulders, and a pair of black single buckle ballet flats. She would have a gold chain-link belt to replace her Maison Boinet one, a cameo necklace of the Virgin Mary, and a gold choker with small bells. Based on my research actual Beret's aren't that common in French culture anymore, though ironically striped shirts and dresses are, but Marie's is canonically the one her mother wore in the episode 'Summer Belongs to You' and familial connection is super important to Maria-so I decided to keep it. I kept her Garcia-Shapiro bow as I am appalled they tried to get rid of Isabella's in AYA(Act your Age)! Vivian clearly still has her from when she was young, and I believe every Garcia-Shapiro who wants one should keep them to some extent throughout their life! Off shoulder tops and dresses are pretty common in France as are sweaters, so I gave Maria an off shoulder sweater dress. And, ballet flats are some of the most common footwear for woman in  France, they have many styles like the single buckle that don't actually look like ballet flats we American's would usually associate with ballet. The jewelry wore by French woman is wore all the time, and is rarely below the quality of 10-carrot gold. Layering necklaces of different sizes such as a cameo necklaces and a choker is normal, and chain-link belts are considered appropriate for any and every outfit. Chokers are a bit longer than some might expect them to be, and I went with a cameo necklace of the Virgin Mary as I headcanon Maria to be a serious Jew. Lastly, make-up in the French world is some of the most neutral in color and shade, so I gave Maria a soft pink lip and nose bridge blush at best.

Thomas' Child Clothing: I heavily dislike Thomas' child design. It lacks any personality in my opinion when compared to Ferbs or Vanessa's. I appreciate that it isn't a ripe off like Marie's, but that doesn't make it good or interesting. Also, this ties into my biggest problem with Thomas, but he's too...boyish. There is nothing wrong with having a practically boyish character, but that kind of personality and style is better used on a character intended to be boyish, and not characters who happen to be boys. I mean Thomas is the son of one of the most headcanon'd nonbinary characters in the whole show, and one of the most headcanon'd bisexual's in the whole show. This is why I mentioned these characters being a bit dated. They definitely came out before LGBTQ+ representation became popular in the fandom-at least compared to the extent of today. So, for Thomas I want to propose a few heavy changes to his child design, starting with...SKIRTS. I petition Thomas to have an either black & white(or purple and green), plaid skirt that reaches his knees. This style of skirt is popular in both British and German(Drusselstein) clothing culture, and is something his family would so support! I mean the potential Thomas has for normalizing clothing as gender neutral is being completely wasted! A white polo shirt inspired by his fathers and his original design underneath. A tweed blazer-of the same color scheme-which is considered always in style in Britain, and the Haferlschuh which are the most popular type of shoe found in Germany-and suit any outfit. Add some tracht socks in white and you have the perfect style!

Thomas' Teen Clothing: This design wasn't horrible, I actually quite like the overall vibe it was going for, but it's not specific enough. I don't find this design to be more than a vibe; It doesn't go deeper than that when it could. So, I summarized it into this; Ripped up, leather pants, sleeveless, white turtleneck, high-heeled, black boots, and to top it all off a trench coat and leather satchel. Considering Thomas is the lead singer and bass guitarist for a classic/heavy rock band I think some ripped leather pants with a bell bottom are perfect. I kept the sleeveless, white classic turtleneck that came from his original design as I do think it's appropriate. I also wanted to pay homage to his mothers almost iconic heels by giving Thomas a similar pair himself; A pair of black, over the knee boots, with a stiletto heel. The trench coat MADE his original design, and the traditional leather satchel is a perfect accent to it, both are British classics in the world of fashion.

Thomas' Rock Outfit: I'm added a subsection for Thomas' clothes as we NEED to talk about his band outfit. I want to say this first, I don't like the original name for the band. Clair is a generic name that doesn't sound too rock-ish in my opinion. It's supposed to represent Maria as it is a French girls name, but it's too simple for someone like Thomas. So, I changed it to Église des Gémeaux which represents Maria in more ways. The name literally translate to Church of Gemini from French to English. It represents Maria's French heritage, her connection to her Jewish Religious roots, and contains a reference to her birth month of June-her birth sign Gemini. The band in itself is canonically represented by The Spill Canvas which is an American Alternative rock band which I also changed. I gave the band a more Eisbrecher/Queen style as Thomas is German(Drusselstein)/British. Eisbrecher is a German Neue Deutsche Härte rock band(translating to New German Hardness aka Industrial Rock), and most of us know Queen the British rock band known for helping to start the rock genre making them a Classic rock band. Major headcanon to this band I want to add, Thomas primarily sings in German(Drusselstein) as he himself has a heavy German(Drusselstein)/British accent. His canonical outfit is a leather top similar to his mothers teenage attire, some basic jeans, and some black boots. I have rewritten this design as such; Ripped up, bell bottom, leather pants, long-sleeve, purple, deep V-neck top, covered by a studded, leather jacket, and keeping his pair of black, over the knee boots, with a stiletto heel. Accent this outfit with some studded, leather cuff bracelets, silver chain choker, and industrial piercing as well as some crescent moon 2nd/Upper lobe piercings. Now, the style of rock/punk is highly personal and changes heavily from generation to generation, but as someone whose family is highly involved in the antique business; It can be expected that Thomas would have a classic rock style inspired by the band he loves such as Eisbrecher, Queen, The Rolling Stones, Mozart L'Opéra rock, Amon Düül II, etc. Some of the elements of his outfit repeat such as his pants and heels, though his deep V-neck is inspired by a picture of Queen. His studded jacket is inspired by MANY rockers of the past. And, his jewelry has a very punk aesthetic. His make-up can be expected to be heavy with intense eyeliner, mascaras, and aided with a plum lip to match his V-neck. While I do enjoy the Grunge style take for Fred & Xavier; I personally find it underwhelming for someone such as Thomas.

I'll end the post here for now as it's getting pretty long. I'll make a post about personality changes at a later point(likely my next post). If you have any questions, comments, etc about what changes I've made feel free to share them! If you have any expertise with French, German, British, or Rock attire and believe I've been misinformed than please tell me! I remind you I am not an expert on fashion, character design, and am only aware of American trends. These changes are entire based on what knowledge is available to me, and my own personal feelings about clothes and characters, but I'm open to learning! I apologize if my opinions come off as harsh, I am merely opinionated about things I enjoy, but I hold no ill-will towards anyone who thinks differently. At the end of the day, I don't own Marie or Thomas or Phineas and Ferb, and am merely expressing my freedom to make or suggest changes. I encourage anyone reading this post to do the same, and be has intense as you feel, of course WITHOUT being insulting of the people you disagree with. Thank you!

[smelllikeholyhell-blog]

Theory, Or: Interclass Activism and a Punk Development

This post serves mostly as any other post on any other website; I wanna write stuff and feel special I guess. That said, allow me to give my background as to why I consider my stance on this to be one of any more-than-minor experience regarding anything.

In my childhood, with an obscene absence of parental or adult authority of any kind, I turned (more often than not) to local punks because that’s what I wanted to be when I grew up. As a result my path through politics has been one of increasingly weird twists and turns that really don’t make a lot of sense. From a small period of christian conservatism in the late 00s, to a nihilist in the early 2010s, an almost groomed-to-be neo nazi as a stepping stone between the two. I had a lot of voices going in and out of my ear and a lot of influences in my path that ultimately led me to where I am today; I smell like shit and I’ve thrown a lot of shit at cops. If I had to choose how to summarise my politics it would be that.

A short disclaimer before going further: Growing up I was a “white, working class” child with no family. The “white working class” myth in America is not only a disgusting, pandering myth. It’s an outright erasure of every non-white citizen within the working class and an attempt to arrange a hierarchy of importance based on outmoded racial demographics. That said I’m not entirely sure on how to approach my birthright identity in any a way more constructive than that, so bear with me while I stumble through that phrase with an increasing reaction of stomach bile every time.

As mentioned; I was ‘white working class’ as a child, this is in the 2000s so that’s hardly of any significance or importance, but when I say working class that is a stretch. My mother was a crackhead, in and out of rehab and only around to be abusive and steal. My father was also a crackhead, albeit the kind that can hold a job. My uncles were drug dealers, my grandma had a weird fucking life and I don’t want to get into that but she was a worker, and the only grandparent alive at the same time as me. This structure in my home life left a large gap of leadership, guidance or comfort and my childhood was divided evenly between time spent outdoors trying to be anywhere but home, and time spent locked in my room hiding from the world. I was diagnosed with ADHD in early childhood, major depressive disorder at 8, generalised anxiety at 11, PTSD at 13 and BPD at 17. Suffice to say balancing all of these things in different intervals, being bounced between different facilities and (as a result) not receiving a continued treatment for anymore than one concurrent issue led to a lot of issues with conventional learning.

This did not stop me from learning, early into my adolescence I established myself as a well-spoken and stalwart voice in my communities (both online and irl) for what I considered to be moral and practical political guidelines. But the formation of the politics that served as the soapbox for those guidelines was something of an event itself that can be traced back to a Ramones CD I received as a birthday gift when I was 5. The case was cracked, the CD was scratched, but I could make out enough of the songs to love it and listen to it everyday until I turned 7 and received a Rancid CD from an uncle who was tired of hearing the Ramones. Shortly after, when I turned 8, a local gave me a Crass CD burnt (very poorly) onto what was a Mariah Carey CD at some point or another. This CD was defaced very horribly and was quickly thrown out within 4 months of coming home with me, but such is life. 

The Crass CD contained a few songs. Banned from the Roxy, General Bacardi, Do They Owe Us A Living, but most importantly for my impressionable young self; Big A Little A. An iconic and time-tested anthem of independent thought and self-sufficiency, a song that rails simultaneously against the systems of oppression so prevalent in the 70s and 80s in the UK, and a song that promotes free expression. It absolutely devastated me in a way I can never put into words, it was transformative like very few things ever have been since and very few things ever will be again. But most importantly it began my path towards anarchism as a school of thought and general principle.

Let’s derail to more relevant information; as a child I struggled to read. Not because I couldn’t or didn’t know how to, I read very well in fact. But I was terminally bored. No matter what it was or what was on the line or what I had to do. I was bored. I would start a book, get 5 pages in, close it and go back to my computer. Go back to the music or the game or whatever, as long as it wasn’t that. As I’ve gotten older I’ve just accepted that I really...don’t like reading. I enjoy writing, I love it, but the act of reading as a way to pass time is one of the most intensely draining and soulsucking experiences in my life, valid as it may be. Most of my political upbringing was based around a mixture of things. Music, conversations, speeches and most importantly a system of failure that is uniquely experienced by every person in the lower classes regardless of identity and race. The system of having your infrastructure devastated, your schools packed, your teachers dismissive of you based on your financial ability to retaliate, and the saving grace of free lunches. Lunches which would be your only food everyday for weeks, sometimes. And in my formative years I spent many weeks and months homeless, not quite “fighting” for survival and in a situation comparatively far less severe than what my nonwhite counterparts have endured, but a difficult one nonetheless.

In many ways around this time I was extremely lucky to grow up in an area as diverse as can be. In a lot of classes I was one of maybe 4 white kids, where most children were latinx or black. I owe this time period a great deal as it allowed me the freedom to learn early how to hold other cultures in a good amount of respect, while also understanding my place at a maintainable but appreciative distance from them. I would later undo this through several years of drug fueled abuse of being given the oh-so-fabled n-word pass by a few black friends, though I can graciously say I moved past that and physically shudder every time I think about that time. But being homeless in this situation, in this region of America and with the great deal of privilege I was handed at birth, offered me an equally great deal of autonomy and my ability to learn where I wanted to learn and how I wanted to learn. If it meant staying up until 5 AM to go on scene trips to the local campus after hours then so be it, but if I wanted to hear what someone had to say I heard what someone had to say. This learning process, while informal and atypical, was the deciding factor in who I became to this day. But there are interclass repercussions for how I’ve learned.

As a young anarchist I attended every event I could. If it was a black bloc I was there. A protest, I was there. Vandalising, squatting and stealing were my favourite pasttimes and I regret absolutely none of it. I can say I’ve punched a cop or two in my time and that’s a pretty fun thing to say albeit entirely alienating when talking to people who aren’t anarchists. Most importantly though; I didn’t show my face. I learned security culture, I learned how to load a gun, I learned how to hide. I did all of it without books and I can say that most of my personal friends have a decent theoretical idea of practise and absolutely no idea how to sustain the execution of it. This, unsurprisingly, has not stopped those people from looking down on me at some point or another. Most still to this day with varying levels of severity. Usually when the topic of anarchy is prevalent I’m asked to give very diplomatic answers or partake in very diplomatic discussions

“What would happen to me in this situation?”

“How would this situation be handled?”

“Who’s your favourite writer?”

“Are you a syndicalist or a mutualist or an egoist?”

At the end of the day most of these discussions generally serve an entirely hypocritical and self-defeatingly toxic pecking order in anarchist circles. Who can theory the other person to death first? so to speak. At its best this behaviour is pedantic and childish. At its worst it just serves to divide current groups and prevent them from further cooperation, the very same cooperation which every single anarchist community inherently relies on for the most minor accomplishment of basic survival. In the last couple of years I’ve adopted a way of dealing with this which is simply in saying; I don’t have time for theory. This isn’t a lie, it isn’t a deflection, it’s the truth. My own time on a day-to-day basis is preoccupied with self-preservation in any capacity that that happens. If self-preservation is a complete distraction from my problems then so be it, no one will ever enforce a schedule on how I deal with my problems unless it’s me or my biological clock. If self-preservation is getting drunk when I wake up, that’s that. If it’s disappearing to go work on something for a few days, that’s that. If it’s networking with other anarchist to establish a network of ideas that’s that. But self-preservation is self-preservation, it is at its core just the act of survival in a capitalist society, one which is built to ensure anything but that survival.

I have noticed that my approach to this is not entirely uncommon in working class circles of anarchist praxis, it’s actually the overriding majority. The anarchists filling potholes are not the same as the anarchists lecturing one another. Debates on the internet for sport do nothing to help communities that are hopelessly marginalised into nonexistence on an hourly basis around the world, so we have to ask ourselves; Where did that mentality come from?

Where is that needless competitive edge in anarchist circles emerging from? My honest input on the matter is muddied, incomplete and unproductive but if I had to place my bet on where it comes from I would place it on a combination of two things. Both of equal performance and importance in their role to this toxicity; the inane publicity of debates, writings and lectures. And the role of competition in capitalist society--the ‘drive to win’ that is drilled from birth. It seems to me most anarchist circles in America and the UK are plagued by self-serving ideologues. People who look at the reputation of Marx, Paine and Chomsky and think to themselves that those people have contributed even a fraction an amount of the importance that unions have in leftist and post-leftist thought and praxis. People have conflated the “teachings” of these men (dogmatic as they are) with the tangible benefits and visibly positive effects that organisations like the IWW have had.

Obviously the teachings of Marx can inextricably be tied to the rise and solidification of union labour in the west, and I will never shortsell that fact no matter how much spite or disdain I hold for marxism. That said the execution, the maintenance and the daily operation of those organisations are independent of their foundational teachings. A framework is not praxis. A foundation is principle, it is logic, but it is not maintenance. To sustain an organisation like the IWW for as long as it has existed is an act not only of spite for a damaging system, it is done out of a sheer perseverance. The ability to transcend the fundamentalist teachings of labour thought and dogma. More importantly it demonstrates the ability to adapt across eras. People familiar with the radical changes, shifts and constant ebb/flow war on unionisation in America can truly appreciate how well the IWW has withstood the test of time.

While the IWW is a far-from-perfect organisation and still presents me with the constant hang-up of withholding total freedom from the working class, it still also presents me a security and benefit that will not happen anywhere else, anytime else. It’s an organisation whose legacy lives on through song as much as any other medium, yet people who are influenced by music and speech are looked down on in so many circles. Obviously this post has to end somewhere so it should end productively.

The total deconstruction of the snide self-serving ideologue status of white anarchists (ironic as it is to pin as a culprit given this post’s existence) is this; It is inherently ableist on its best day and it is gatekeeping classism on its worst. It is both counterproductive to cooperative efforts and a complete betrayal of the concept of solidarity by way of competition.

If you find yourself in this position or confronted after having taken that position, ask yourself the following;

Does the child of the average working class family have the time for theory? Will theory tangibly help them survive? Has theory protected them from homelessness, hunger or sickness? Will theory provide for their family?

The answer to these questions, historically and demonstrably is ‘No’. It will continue to be ‘No’ for as long as the working class is trapped in a system that enslaves us all. Theory can help structure direct action, but theory on its own is a waste of time that will not benefit anyone who truly needs the benefits they can receive, in a system that will happily kill them.